MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163844721 · doi:10.1109/tip.2012.2233482

Frozen-State Hierarchical Annealing

2012· article· en· W2163844721 on OpenAlexaff
Wesley R. Campaigne, Paul Fieguth

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimulated annealingComputer scienceComputational complexity theoryAlgorithmScale (ratio)Flexibility (engineering)Theoretical computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is significant interest in the synthesis of discrete-state random fields, particularly those possessing structure over a wide range of scales. However, given a model on some finest, pixellated scale, it is computationally very difficult to synthesize both large- and small-scale structures, motivating research into hierarchical methods. In this paper, we propose a frozen-state approach to hierarchical modeling, in which simulated annealing is performed on each scale, constrained by the state estimates at the parent scale. This approach leads to significant advantages in both modeling flexibility and computational complexity. In particular, a complex structure can be realized with very simple, local, scale-dependent models, and by constraining the domain to be annealed at finer scales to only the uncertain portions of coarser scales; the approach leads to huge improvements in computational complexity. Results are shown for a synthesis problem in porous media.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207