MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145352743 · doi:10.1002/jcc.20484

An algorithm for three‐dimensional Voronoi S‐network

2006· article· en· W2145352743 on OpenAlexaff
N. N. Medvedev, V. P. Voloshin, Valériy Luchnikov, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Chemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsVoronoi diagramDelaunay triangulationSPHERESAlgorithmRealization (probability)Centroidal Voronoi tessellationComputer scienceBowyer–Watson algorithmComputational geometryMathematicsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents an algorithm for calculating the three-dimensional Voronoi-Delaunay tessellation for an ensemble of spheres of different radii (additively-weighted Voronoi diagram). Data structure and output of the algorithm is oriented toward the exploration of the voids between the spheres. The main geometric construct that we develop is the Voronoi S-network (the network of vertices and edges of the Voronoi regions determined in relation to the surfaces of the spheres). General scheme of the algorithm and the key points of its realization are discussed. The principle of the algorithm is that for each determined site of the network we find its neighbor sites. Thus, starting from a known site of the network, we sequentially find the whole network. The starting site of the network is easily determined based on certain considerations. Geometric properties of ensembles of spheres of different radii are discussed, the conditions of applicability and limitations of the algorithm are indicated. The algorithm is capable of working with a wide variety of physical models, which may be represented as sets of spheres, including computer models of complex molecular systems. Emphasis was placed on the issue of increasing the efficiency of algorithm to work with large models (tens of thousands of atoms). It was demonstrated that the experimental CPU time increases linearly with the number of atoms in the system, O(n).

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)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations101
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational ChemistrySame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207