MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1860382590 · doi:10.1002/env.2184

Data assimilation for large‐scale spatio‐temporal systems using a location particle smoother

2013· article· en· W1860382590 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Briggs, Michael K. Dowd, Renate Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Auckland
KeywordsData assimilationParticle filterKalman filterComputer scienceEnsemble Kalman filterProbability density functionConditional probability distributionNonlinear systemAlgorithmState variableMathematical optimizationData miningMathematicsEconometricsStatisticsExtended Kalman filterMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data assimilation estimates the time evolution of the probability density function (PDF) of state vectors characterising high‐dimensional nonlinear spatiotemporal dynamic systems, making use of available observations. The current best‐practice statistical data assimilation technique – the ensemble Kalman filter – relies on restrictive normality assumptions. The particle filter provides a methodology for estimating these PDFs without requiring these restrictive distributional assumptions using samples drawn from the conditional state PDF given available observations. Unfortunately, particle filter weight collapse is severe when the state and/or observation vectors are high dimensional, making them impractical for systems with a spatial component. We offer a solution to this problem by drawing the required sample from the conditional PDF at each time step using a particle smoother across the spatial locations. A further innovation is the use of meta‐elliptical copulas to provide a general framework for defining the prediction PDFs – one flexible enough to accurately describe the numerical model errors and fast enough to sample to be applicable in practice. The proposed methods perform well compared with other candidate approaches in a 1000 dimensional spatiotemporal simulation study and a real 1750 dimensional marine ecosystem application based on partial differential equations and ocean monitoring data. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207