MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062259084 · doi:10.1109/aps.2004.1330288

Dispersion analysis and comparative study of Coifman scaling function based S-MRTD

2004· article· en· W2062259084 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalingFunction (biology)SmoothnessMathematical analysisDispersion (optics)Applied mathematicsFinite difference methodBasis (linear algebra)MathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A detailed analysis and comparative study of a finite difference numerical scheme (of the S-MRTD type) based on Coifman scaling functions (coiflets) of various degrees is presented in this paper. The smoothness properties of the Coifman basis functions provide for highly linear dispersion behavior of the resulting numerical scheme. In addition, the fact that coiflets are compactly supported adds to the numerical efficiency of the method. A comparison with Daubechies and Battle-Lemarie function based S-MRTD reveals a number of advantages in the use of coiflets as a basis for the formulation of S-MRTD schemes, while their overall performance is deemed similar to the former and better than the latter.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.263 · 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