MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123397419 · doi:10.1063/1.1854634

Is the Filinov integral conditioning technique useful in semiclassical initial value representation methods?

2005· article· en· W2123397419 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Spanner, Víctor S. Batista, Paul Brumer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum chaos and dynamical systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSemiclassical physicsChaoticCurse of dimensionalityTruncation (statistics)Representation (politics)MathematicsAmplitudeStatistical physicsConvergence (economics)ConditioningFilter (signal processing)Initial value problemApplied mathematicsQuantumPhysicsMathematical analysisComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utility of the Filinov integral conditioning technique, as implemented in semiclassical initial value representation (SC-IVR) methods, is analyzed for a number of regular and chaotic systems. For nonchaotic systems of low dimensionality, the Filinov technique is found to be quite ineffective at accelerating convergence of semiclassical calculations since, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the semiclassical integrands usually do not exhibit significant phase oscillations in regions of large integrand amplitude. In the case of chaotic dynamics, it is found that the regular component is accurately represented by the SC-IVR, even when using the Filinov integral conditioning technique, but that quantum manifestations of chaotic behavior was easily overdamped by the filtering technique. Finally, it is shown that the level of approximation introduced by the Filinov filter is, in general, comparable to the simpler ad hoc truncation procedure introduced by Kay.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.363
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations28
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicQuantum chaos and dynamical systemsFrench-language works237,207