MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088838320 · doi:10.1080/00411450903238665

Modeling Error in L<sup>1</sup>for a Hierarchy of 1-D Discrete Velocity Models

2009· article· en· W2088838320 on OpenAlexaffabout
K. C. Assi, Marc Laforest

Bibliographic record

VenueTransport Theory and Statistical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHierarchyDimension (graph theory)MathematicsSpace (punctuation)Measure (data warehouse)ResidualA priori and a posterioriTerm (time)Work (physics)Nonlinear systemApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisPure mathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider the spatial difference in L 1 between solutions to two different discrete velocity models in one space dimension. We assume that the second (fine) model is obtained by adding new velocities to the first (coarse) model, although the collision operators can be completely different. The 1-D discrete velocity models studied here include projections of n-D models, as described by Beale. This work adapts the nonlinear and decreasing interaction functional of Ha and Tzavaras for discrete velocity models in 1-D in order to measure the distance in L 1 . The resulting functional increases by a term proportional to the residual of the modeling error for the coarse model. The modeling error can therefore be computed a posteriori and can be used to determine which discrete velocity model within a hierarchy satisfies a prescribed accuracy. Keywords: A posterioriBoltzmann equationDiscrete velocity modelError estimateModeling errorNonlinear hyperbolic equation. Supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransport Theory and Statistical PhysicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207