On the Selection of Ordinary Differential Equation Models with Application to Predator-Prey Dynamical Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider model selection and estimation in a context where there are competing ordinary differential equation (ODE) models, and all the models are special cases of a "full" model. We propose a computationally inexpensive approach that employs statistical estimation of the full model, followed by a combination of a least squares approximation (LSA) and the adaptive Lasso. We show the resulting method, here called the LSA method, to be an (asymptotically) oracle model selection method. The finite sample performance of the proposed LSA method is investigated with Monte Carlo simulations, in which we examine the percentage of selecting true ODE models, the efficiency of the parameter estimation compared to simply using the full and true models, and coverage probabilities of the estimated confidence intervals for ODE parameters, all of which have satisfactory performances. Our method is also demonstrated by selecting the best predator-prey ODE to model a lynx and hare population dynamical system among some well-known and biologically interpretable ODE models.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it