MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142595675 · doi:10.1093/imamat/hxt032

An efficient numerical algorithm for the L2 optimal transport problem with periodic densities

2013· article· en· W2142595675 on OpenAlexaff
Louis-Philippe Saumier, Martial Agueh, Boualem Khouider

Bibliographic record

VenueIMA Journal of Applied Mathematics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric Analysis and Curvature Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsDiscretizationPartial differential equationMathematical analysisNumerical analysisAlgorithmBounded functionNewton's methodApplied mathematicsNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an extension of the numerical method of Loeper and Rapetti (2005, Numerical solution of the Monge–Ampère equation by a Newton's algorithm. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, I, 319–324) for the Monge–Ampère equation to non-uniform target densities and adopt it to solve the optimal transport problem with quadratic cost. The method employs a damped Newton algorithm to solve the Monge–Ampère equation. We show that the algorithm converges for sufficiently large damping coefficients, for the case where the source and target densities are sufficiently smooth, periodic and bounded away from zero. At each Newton iteration, we solve a non-constant coefficient linear partial differential equation. To improve the efficiency of the procedure, we use an analytically preconditioned fast Fourier transform method coupled with GMRES (Strain, J. (1994) Fast spectrally-accurate solution of variable-coefficients elliptic problems. Proc. Amer. Math. Sci., 122, 843–850) to solve this equation, as opposed to a more straightforward approach based on a second-order finite-difference discretization combined with biconjugate gradient used in the original LOEPER and RAPETTI paper. Finally, we present some numerical experiments in image processing to demonstrate the efficiency of the method.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIMA Journal of Applied MathematicsSame topicGeometric Analysis and Curvature FlowsFrench-language works237,207