MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008849850 · doi:10.1137/140971890

Div First-Order System LL* (FOSLL*) for Second-Order Elliptic Partial Differential Equations

2015· article· en· W2008849850 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiqiang Cai, Robert D. Falgout, Shun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorPartial differential equationA priori and a posterioriApplied mathematicsElliptic partial differential equationFinite element methodDiscontinuous Galerkin methodNorm (philosophy)Ordinary differential equationGalerkin methodResidualDifferential equationMathematical analysisAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first-order system LL* (FOSLL*) approach for general second-order elliptic partial differential equations was proposed and analyzed in [Z. Cai et al., SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 39 (2001), pp. 1418--1445], in order to retain the full efficiency of the $L^2$ norm first-order system least-squares (FOSLS) approach while exhibiting the generality of the inverse-norm FOSLS approach. The FOSLL* approach of Cai et al. was applied to the div-curl system with added slack variables, and hence it is quite complicated. In this paper, we apply the FOSLL* approach to the div system and establish its well-posedness. For the corresponding finite element approximation, we obtain a quasi-optimal a priori error bound under the same regularity assumption as the standard Galerkin method, but without the restriction to sufficiently small mesh size. Unlike the FOSLS approach, the FOSLL* approach does not have a free a posteriori error estimator. We then propose an explicit residual error estimator and establish its reliability and efficiency bounds.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Numerical AnalysisSame topicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational MathematicsFrench-language works237,207