MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012430741 · doi:10.1063/1.4867877

Solving Winfree's puzzle: The isochrons in the FitzHugh-Nagumo model

2014· article· en· W2012430741 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern Formation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsIsochron datingBoundary (topology)Orbit (dynamics)ContinuationIsochronManifold (fluid mechanics)MathematicsSensitivity (control systems)Statistical physicsMathematical analysisComputer sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the FitzHugh-Nagumo model, an example of a system with two time scales for which Winfree was unable to determine the overall structure of the isochrons. An isochron is the set of all points in the basin of an attracting periodic orbit that converge to this periodic orbit with the same asymptotic phase. We compute the isochrons as one-dimensional parametrised curves with a method based on the continuation of suitable two-point boundary value problems. This allows us to present in detail the geometry of how the basin of attraction is foliated by isochrons. They exhibit extreme sensitivity and feature sharp turns, which is why Winfree had difficulties finding them. We observe that the sharp turns and sensitivity of the isochrons are associated with the slow-fast nature of the FitzHugh-Nagumo system; more specifically, it occurs near its repelling (unstable) slow manifold.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.291 · 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