MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125878398 · doi:10.1002/mren.200900033

Design of Optimal Sequential Experiments to Improve Model Predictions from a Polyethylene Molecular Weight Distribution Model

2009· article· en· W2125878398 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecular Reaction Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxima and minimaDesign of experimentsOptimal designEstimation theoryComputer scienceExperimental dataWork (physics)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsStatisticsMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reliable model predictions require an appropriate model structure and also good parameter estimates. For good parameter estimates to be obtained, it is important that the data used in parameter estimation are informative. Alphabet‐optimal experimental designs can be used to ensure that new experiments are as informative as possible. This work presents the development of D‐ and A‐optimal sequential experimental designs for improving parameter precision in a molecular‐weight‐distribution model for Ziegler‐Natta‐catalyzed polyethylene. Novel V‐optimal designs techniques are developed to improve the precision of model predictions, and anticipated benefits are quantified. Problems with local minima are discussed and comparisons between the optimality criteria are made. magnified image

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.302 · 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