MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1856728957 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1210.2644

Fourier analysis of the CGMN method for solving the Helmholtz equation

2012· preprint· en· W1856728957 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tristan van Leeuwen

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHelmholtz equationConvergence (economics)Applied mathematicsExpression (computer science)Krylov subspaceRelaxation (psychology)Helmholtz free energyMatrix (chemical analysis)Computer scienceFourier transformWave equationMathematicsWavenumberIterative methodMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Helmholtz equation arises in many applications, such as seismic and medical imaging. These application are characterized by the need to propagate many wavelengths through an inhomogeneous medium. The typical size of the problems in 3D applications precludes the use of direct factorization to solve the equation and hence iterative methods are used in practice. For higher wavenumbers, the system becomes increasingly indefinite and thus good preconditioners need to be constructed. In this note we consider an accelerated Kazcmarz method (CGMN) and present an expression for the resulting iteration matrix. This iteration matrix can be used to analyze the convergence of the CGMN method. In particular, we present a Fourier analysis for the method applied to the 1D Helmholtz equation. This analysis suggests an optimal choice of the relaxation parameter. Finally, we present some numerical experiments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.132 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207