MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Riesz bases of wavelets and applications to numerical solutions of elliptic equations

2011· article· en· W2083459883 on OpenAlexafffund
Rong-Qing Jia, Wei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Computation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiharmonic equationMathematicsSobolev spaceWaveletMathematical analysisUnit squareElliptic curveFinite element methodBounded functionUnit sphereBoundary value problemPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate Riesz bases of wavelets in Sobolev spaces and their applications to numerical solutions of the biharmonic equation and general elliptic equations of fourth-order. First, we study bicubic splines on the unit square with homogeneous boundary conditions. The approximation properties of these cubic splines are established and applied to convergence analysis of the finite element method for the biharmonic equation. Second, we develop a fairly general theory for Riesz bases of Hilbert spaces equipped with induced norms. Under the guidance of the general theory, we are able to construct wavelet bases for Sobolev spaces on the unit square. The condition numbers of the stiffness matrices associated with the wavelet bases are relatively small and uniformly bounded. Third, we provide several numerical examples to show that the numerical schemes based on our wavelet bases are very efficient. Finally, we extend our study to general elliptic equations of fourth-order and demonstrate that our numerical schemes also have superb performance in the general case.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics of ComputationSame topicNumerical methods in engineeringFrench-language works237,207