Computation of accurate nodal derivatives of finite element solutions: the finite node displacement method
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents a new method for extracting high‐accuracy nodal derivatives from finite element solutions. The approach involves imposing a finite displacement to individual mesh nodes, and solving a very small problem on the patch of surrounding elements, whose only unknown is the value of the solution at the displaced node. A finite difference between the original and perturbed values provides the directional derivative. Verification is shown for a one‐dimensional diffusion problem with exact nodal solution and for two‐dimensional scalar advective–diffusive problems. For internal nodes the method yields accuracy slightly superior to that of the superconvergent patch recovery (SPR) technique of Zienkiewicz and Zhu (ZZ). We also present a variant of the method to treat boundary nodes. In this case, the local discretization is enriched by inserting an additional mesh point very close to the boundary node of interest. We show that the new method gives normal derivatives at boundary points that are consistent with the so‐called ‘ auxiliary fluxes ’. The resulting nodal derivatives are much more accurate than those obtained by the ZZ SPR technique. Copyright © 2007 Crown in the right of Canada. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it