MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074194193 · doi:10.1063/1.4816123

Conservative parameterization schemes

2013· article· en· W2074194193 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Bihlo, George W. Bluman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods for differential equations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApplied mathematicsMathematicsCalculus (dental)PhysicsTheoretical physicsAlgebra over a fieldComputer sciencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parameterization (closure) schemes in numerical weather and climate prediction models account for the effects of physical processes that cannot be resolved explicitly by these models. Methods for finding physical parameterization schemes that preserve conservation laws of systems of differential equations are introduced. These methods rest on the possibility to regard the problem of finding conservative parameterization schemes as a conservation law classification problem for classes of differential equations. The relevant classification problems can be solved using the direct or inverse classification procedures. In the direct approach, one starts with a general functional form of the parameterization scheme. Specific forms are then found so that corresponding closed equations admit conservation laws. In the inverse approach, one seeks parameterization schemes that preserve one or more pre-selected conservation laws of the initial model. The physical interpretation of both classification approaches is discussed. Special attention is paid to the problem of finding parameterization schemes that preserve both conservation laws and symmetries. All methods are illustrated by finding conservative and invariant conservative parameterization schemes for systems of one-dimensional shallow-water equations.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicNumerical methods for differential equationsFrench-language works237,207