MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109945488 · doi:10.1109/ciisp.2007.369311

Evolutionary Exploration of Generalized Julia Sets

2007· article· en· W2109945488 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Ashlock, Brooke Jamieson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJulia setMandelbrot setGeneralizationMathematicsQuadratic equationFractalSimple (philosophy)Quadratic functionSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmComputer scienceCombinatoricsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Julia sets are fractal subsets of the complex plane defined by a simple iterative algorithm. Julia sets are specified by a single complex parameter and their appearances are indexed by the Mandelbrot set. This study presents a simple generalization of the quadratic Julia set that requires two complex parameters. The generalization causes the Mandelbrot set indexing the generalized Julia sets to become 4-dimensional and hence difficult to use as a visual index. An evolutionary algorithm is used to search the space of generalized quadratic Julia sets. A type of fitness function is presented that permits the artist exert some control over the appearance of the resulting Julia sets. The impact of different versions of the fitness function on the resulting Julia sets is explored. It is found that the designed fitness functions do give substantial control over the appearance of the resulting fractals

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207