On numerical solver selection and related uncertainty terminology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mathematical models provide insight into numerous biological, physical and chemical systems. They can be used in process design, optimisation, control and decision support, as acknowledged in many different fields of scientific research. Mathematical models do not always yield reliable results and uncertainty should be taken into account. At present, it is possible to identify some factors contributing to uncertainty, and the awareness of the necessity of uncertainty assessment is rising. In the fields of Environmental Modelling and Computational Fluid Dynamics, for instance, terminology related to uncertainty exists and is generally accepted. However, the uncertainty due to the choice of the numerical solver and its settings used to compute the solution of the models did not receive much attention in the past. A motivating example on the existence and effect of numerical uncertainty is provided and clearly shows that we can no longer ignore it. This paper introduces a new terminology to support communication about uncertainty caused by numerical solvers, so that scientists become perceptive to it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it