MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating Parameter Uncertainty in Binding-Energy Models by the Frequency-Domain Bootstrap

2017· article· en· W2600727226 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Washington
KeywordsCalibrationFrequency domainBayesian probabilityGaussian processGaussianStatistical physicsComputer scienceObservational errorPhysicsApplied mathematicsStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose using the frequency-domain bootstrap (FDB) to estimate errors of modeling parameters when the modeling error is itself a major source of uncertainty. Unlike the usual bootstrap or the simple χ^{2} analysis, the FDB can take into account correlations between errors. It is also very fast compared to the Gaussian process Bayesian estimate as often implemented for computer model calibration. The method is illustrated with a simple example, the liquid drop model of nuclear binding energies. We find that the FDB gives a more conservative estimate of the uncertainty in liquid drop parameters than the χ^{2} method, and is in fair accord with more empirical estimates. For the nuclear physics application, there are no apparent obstacles to apply the method to the more accurate and detailed models based on density-functional theory.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.236 · 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