Comparison of Methods for Inverse Design of Radiant Enclosures
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 A particular inverse design problem is proposed as a benchmark for comparison of five solution techniques used in design of enclosures with radiating sources. The enclosure is three-dimensional and includes some surfaces that are diffuse and others that are specular diffuse. Two aspect ratios are treated. The problem is completely described, and solutions are presented as obtained by the Tikhonov method, truncated singular value decomposition, conjugate gradient regularization, quasi-Newton minimization, and simulated annealing. All of the solutions use a common set of exchange factors computed by Monte Carlo, and smoothed by a constrained maximum likelihood estimation technique that imposes conservation, reciprocity, and non-negativity. Solutions obtained by the various methods are presented and compared, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of these methods are summarized.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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