MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972657290 · doi:10.1145/1824801.1864430

An Interoperable, Data-Structure-Neutral Component for Mesh Query and Manipulation

2010· article· en· W1972657290 on OpenAlexaff
Carl Ollivier‐Gooch, Lori Freitag Diachin, Mark S. Shephard, Timothy J. Tautges, Jason A. Kraftcheck, Vitus J. Leung, Xiaojuan Luo, Mark Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Mathematical Software · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComponent (thermodynamics)Interface (matter)Data structureInteroperabilityApplication programming interfaceImplementationSoftware frameworkDistributed computingCommon Component ArchitectureComponent-based software engineeringOverhead (engineering)SoftwareData model (GIS)Code (set theory)ReuseAdaptive mesh refinementProgramming languageParallel computingOperating systemSoftware developmentComputational science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much of the effort required to create a new simulation code goes into developing infrastructure for mesh data manipulation, adaptive refinement, design optimization, and so forth. This infrastructure is an obvious target for code reuse, except that implementations of these functionalities are typically tied to specific data structures. In this article, we describe a software component---an abstract data model and programming interface---designed to provide low-level mesh query and manipulation support for meshing and solution algorithms. The component’s data model provides a data abstraction, completely hiding all details of how mesh data is stored, while its interface defines how applications can interact with that data. Because the component has been carefully designed to be general purpose and efficient, it provides a practical platform for implementing high-level mesh operations independently of the underlying mesh data structures. After describing the data model and interface, we provide several usage examples, each of which has been used successfully with multiple implementations of the interface functionality. The overhead due to accessing mesh data through the interface rather than directly accessing the underlying mesh data is shown to be acceptably small.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Mathematical SoftwareSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207