COLLAGE-BASED INVERSE PROBLEMS FOR IFSM WITH ENTROPY MAXIMIZATION AND SPARSITY CONSTRAINTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the inverse problem associated with IFSM: Given a target function f, find an IFSM, such that its invariant fixed point f is sufficiently close to f in the Lp distance. In this paper, we extend the collage-based method developed by Forte and Vrscay (1995) along two different directions. We first search for a set of mappings that not only minimizes the collage error but also maximizes the entropy of the dynamical system. We then include an extra term in the minimization process which takes into account the sparsity of the set of mappings. In this new formulation, the minimization of collage error is treated as multi-criteria problem: we consider three different and conflicting criteria i.e., collage error, entropy and sparsity. To solve this multi-criteria program we proceed by scalarization and we reduce the model to a single-criterion program by combining all objective functions with different trade-off weights. The results of some numerical computations are presented. Numerical studies indicate that a maximum entropy principle exists for this approximation problem, i.e., that the suboptimal solutions produced by collage coding can be improved at least slightly by adding a maximum entropy criterion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".