MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115646318 · doi:10.1002/nag.902

A three‐point time discretization technique for parabolic partial differential equations

2010· article· en· W2115646318 on OpenAlexaff
Arman Khoshghalb, Nasser Khalili, A. P. S. Selvadurai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods for differential equations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationMathematicsSpurious relationshipPartial differential equationOscillation (cell signaling)Stability (learning theory)Variable (mathematics)Numerical analysisApplied mathematicsParabolic partial differential equationNumerical stabilityScheme (mathematics)Mathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Crank–Nicolson scheme has second‐order accuracy, but often leads to oscillations affecting numerical stability. On the other hand, the implicit scheme is free from oscillation, but it has only first‐order accuracy. In this work, a three‐point discretization scheme with variable time step is presented for the time marching of parabolic partial differential equations. The method proposed has second‐order accuracy, is unconditionally stable and dampens spurious oscillations of the numerical results. The application and effectiveness of the new method are demonstrated through several numerical examples. It is shown that, unlike the Crank–Nicolson method, the approach proposed produces no oscillatory response irrespective of the time step adopted. Copyright © 2010 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.377 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in GeomechanicsSame topicNumerical methods for differential equationsFrench-language works237,207