MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151560129 · doi:10.1002/wics.1269

Sparse matrix computations with application to solve system of nonlinear equations

2013· review· en· W2151560129 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahadat Hossain, Trond Steihaug

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Statistics · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Excellent ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsSparse matrixMatrix-free methodsNonlinear systemLinear algebraComputer scienceApplied mathematicsNumerical linear algebraNumerical analysisNonlinear programmingAlgorithmMatrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical linear algebra is an essential ingredient in algorithms for solving problems in optimization, nonlinear equations, and differential equations. Spanning diverse application areas, from economic planning to complex network analysis, modeling and solving problems arising in those areas share a common theme: numerical calculations on matrices that are sparse or structured or both. Linear algebraic calculations involving sparse matrices of order 109 are now routine. In this article, we give an overview of scientific calculations where effective utilization of properties such as sparsity, problem structure, etc. play a vital role and where the linear algebraic calculations are much more complex than their dense counterpart. This is partly because operation and storage involving known zeros must be avoided, and partly because the fact that modern computing hardware may not be amenable to the specialized techniques needed for sparse problems. We focus on sparse calculations arising in nonlinear equation solving using the Newton method. This article is categorized under: Applications of Computational Statistics > Computational Mathematics Data: Types and Structure > Categorical Data Algorithms and Computational Methods > Quadratic and Nonlinear Programming Algorithms and Computational Methods > Numerical Methods

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational StatisticsSame topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207