MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099791110 · doi:10.5120/11532-5386

A Comparative Study of Galerkin Finite Element and B-Spline Methods for Two Point Boundary Value Problems

2013· article· en· W2099791110 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

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Applications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNumerical methods in engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFinite element methodB-splineGalerkin methodPoint (geometry)Boundary value problemApplied mathematicsSpline (mechanical)Mathematical analysisMathematicsGeometryStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In chemical engineering, deflection of beams and other area of engineering the two point boundary value problems with Neumann and mixed Robbin's boundary conditions have great importance. It is not easy task to solve numerically such type of problems. In this study a B-spline finite element has been introduced to get the solution of two point boundary value problem. Some test examples are considered for the applicability of the purposed scheme. Further the results are compared with simple Galerkin-finite element method and with the exact solution of the problems. Throughout the discussion, it is observed that the proposed technique is performing well.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.350 · 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