MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019943686 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v4n5p34

A Simple Derivation of Newton-Cotes Formulas with Realistic Errors

2012· article· en· W2019943686 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicIterative Methods for Nonlinear Equations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsGaussian quadratureOrder (exchange)Quadrature (astronomy)Sign (mathematics)Function (biology)Simple (philosophy)Mathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to approximate the integral $I(f)=\int_a^b f(x) dx$, where $f$ is a sufficiently smooth function, models for quadrature rules are developed using a given {\it panel} of $n\,\,(n\geq 2)$ equally spaced points. These models arise from the undetermined coefficients method, using a Newton's basis for polynomials. Although part of the final product is algebraically equivalent to the well known closed Newton-Cotes rules, the algorithms obtained are not the classical ones.In the basic model the most simple quadrature rule $Q_n$ is adopted (the so-called left rectangle rule) and a correction $\tilde E_n$ is constructed, so that the final rule $S_n=Q_n+\tilde E_n$ is interpolatory. The correction $\tilde E_n$, depending on the divided differences of the data, might be considered a {\em realistic correction} for $Q_n$, in the sense that $\tilde E_n$ should be close to the magnitude of the true error of $Q_n$, having also the correct sign. The analysis of the theoretical error of the rule $S_n$ as well as some classical properties for divided differences suggest the inclusion of one or two new points in the given panel. When $n$ is even it is included one point and two points otherwise. In both cases this approach enables the computation of a {\em realistic error} $\bar E_{S_n}$ for the {\it extended or corrected} rule $S_n$. The respective output $(Q_n,\tilde E_n, S_n, \bar E_{S_n})$ contains reliable information on the quality of the approximations $Q_n$ and $S_n$, provided certain conditions involving ratios for the derivatives of the function $f$ are fulfilled. These simple rules are easily converted into {\it composite} ones. Numerical examples are presented showing that these quadrature rules are useful as a computational alternative to the classical Newton-Cotes formulas.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.416
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.120 · 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