MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157659415 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1406.0967

Anisotropic interactions in a first-order aggregation model: a proof of concept

2014· article· en· W2157659415 on OpenAlexaff
Joep H. M. Evers, Razvan C. Fetecau, Lenya Ryzhik

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUniquenessAnisotropyClassification of discontinuitiesJumpOdeInertiaMathematicsStatistical physicsRelaxation (psychology)Mathematical analysisIsotropyApplied mathematicsClassical mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We extend a well-studied ODE model for collective behaviour by considering anisotropic interactions among individuals. Anisotropy is modelled by limited sensorial perception of individuals, that depends on their current direction of motion. Consequently, the first-order model becomes implicit, and new analytical issues, such as non-uniqueness and jump discontinuities in velocities, are being raised. We study the well-posedness of the anisotropic model and discuss its modes of breakdown. To extend solutions beyond breakdown we propose a relaxation system containing a small parameter $\varepsilon$, which can be interpreted as a small amount of inertia or response time. We show that the limit $\varepsilon \to 0$ can be used as a jump criterion to select the physically correct velocities. In smooth regimes, the convergence of the relaxation system as $\varepsilon \to 0$ is guaranteed by a theorem due to Tikhonov. We illustrate the results with numerical simulations in two dimensions.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207