MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576001493 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1208.4698

Error analysis of linearized semi-implicit Galerkin finite element methods for nonlinear parabolic equations

2012· preprint· en· W1576001493 on OpenAlexaff
Buyang Li, Weiwei Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonlinear systemFinite element methodMathematicsGalerkin methodDiscontinuous Galerkin methodNorm (philosophy)Backward Euler methodApplied mathematicsParabolic partial differential equationEuler equationsMathematical analysisPartial differential equationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with the time-step condition of commonly-used linearized semi-implicit schemes for nonlinear parabolic PDEs with Galerkin finite element approximations. In particular, we study the time-dependent nonlinear Joule heating equations. We present optimal error estimates of the semi-implicit Euler scheme in both the $L^2$ norm and the $H^1$ norm without any time-step restriction. Theoretical analysis is based on a new splitting of the error and precise analysis of a corresponding time-discrete system. The method used in this paper can be applied to more general nonlinear parabolic systems and many other linearized (semi)-implicit time discretizations for which previous works often require certain restriction on the time-step size $τ$.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.295 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations108
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational MathematicsFrench-language works237,207