MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W113453355 · doi:10.2172/883740

ISCR FY2005 Annual Report

2006· report· en· W113453355 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David E. Keyes, James R. McGraw

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Circulatory and Respiratory HealthU.S. Department of CommerceLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsNational laboratoryComputer scienceNational securityOperations researchData scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceEngineering physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale scientific computation and all of the disciplines that support and help validate it have been placed at the focus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) by the Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) program of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) initiative of the Office of Science of the Department of Energy (DOE). The maturation of simulation as a fundamental tool of scientific and engineering research is underscored in the President's Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC) June 2005 finding that ''computational science has become critical to scientific leadership, economic competitiveness, and national security''. LLNL operates several of the world's most powerful computers--including today's single most powerful--and has undertaken some of the largest and most compute-intensive simulations ever performed, most notably the molecular dynamics simulation that sustained more than 100 Teraflop/s and won the 2005 Gordon Bell Prize. Ultrascale simulation has been identified as one of the highest priorities in DOE's facilities planning for the next two decades. However, computers at architectural extremes are notoriously difficult to use in an efficient manner. Furthermore, each successful terascale simulation only points out the need for much better ways of interacting with the resulting avalanche of data. Advances in scientific computing research have, therefore, never been more vital to the core missions of LLNL than at present. Computational science is evolving so rapidly along every one of its research fronts that to remain on the leading edge, LLNL must engage researchers at many academic centers of excellence. In FY 2005, the Institute for Scientific Computing Research (ISCR) served as one of LLNL's main bridges to the academic community with a program of collaborative subcontracts, visiting faculty, student internships, workshops, and an active seminar series. The ISCR identifies researchers from the academic community for computer science and computational science collaborations with LLNL and hosts them for both brief and extended visits with the aim of encouraging long-term academic research agendas that address LLNL research priorities. Through these collaborations, ideas and software flow in both directions, and LLNL cultivates its future workforce. The Institute strives to be LLNL's ''eyes and ears'' in the computer and information sciences, keeping the Laboratory aware of and connected to important external advances. It also attempts to be the ''hands and feet'' that carry those advances into the Laboratory and incorporate them into practice. ISCR research participants are integrated into LLNL's Computing Applications and Research (CAR) Department, especially into its Center for Applied Scientific Computing (CASC). In turn, these organizations address computational challenges arising throughout the rest of the Laboratory. Administratively, the ISCR flourishes under LLNL's University Relations Program (URP). Together with the other four institutes of the URP, the ISCR navigates a course that allows LLNL to benefit from academic exchanges while preserving national security. While it is difficult to operate an academic-like research enterprise within the context of a national security laboratory, the results declare the challenges well met and worth the continued effort. The pages of this annual report summarize the activities of the faculty members, postdoctoral researchers, students, and guests from industry and other laboratories who participated in LLNL's computational mission under the auspices of the ISCR during FY 2005.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.234
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207