MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interpretation of Monte Carlo Simulations Using Parameter Space Plots

2004· article· en· W2024839890 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiative Heat Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodInterpretation (philosophy)Statistical physicsSpace (punctuation)Hybrid Monte CarloDynamic Monte Carlo methodMonte Carlo method in statistical physicsComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsMarkov chain Monte CarloPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimodal distribution functions that result from Monte Carlo simulations can be interpreted by superimposing joint probability density functions onto the contour space of the simulated calculations. The method is demonstrated by analysis of the pathway of a radioactive groundwater contaminant using an analytical solution to the transport equation. Simulated concentrations at a fixed time and distance produce multimodal histograms, which are understood with reference to the parameter space for the two random variables-velocity and dispersivity. Numerical integration under the joint density function up to the contour of the analytical solution gives the probability of contaminant exceeding a target concentration. This technique is potentially more efficient than Monte Carlo simulation for low probability events. Visualization of parameter space is restricted to two random variables. Nevertheless, analyzing the two most pertinent random variables in a simulation might still offer insights into the multimodal nature of output histograms.

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)0.017
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicRadiative Heat Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207