MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609549470 · doi:10.3934/dcdsb.2017144

Predicting and estimating probability density functions of chaotic systems

2017· article· en· W2609549470 on OpenAlexaff
Noah H. Rhee, Paweł Góra, Majid Bani-Yaghoub

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - B · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and environmental studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChaoticProbability density functionMathematicsMeasure (data warehouse)Probability measureLebesgue measureInvariant (physics)LimitingStatistical physicsLebesgue integrationInvariant measureChaotic hysteresisFunction (biology)Absolute continuitySequence (biology)Applied mathematicsMathematical analysisSynchronization of chaosStatisticsComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)PhysicsErgodic theoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present work, for the first time, we employ Ulam's method to estimate and to predict the existence of the probability density functions of single species populations with chaotic dynamics. In particular, given a chaotic map, we show that Ulam's method generates a sequence of density functions in L1-space that may converge weakly to a function in L1-space. In such a case we show that the limiting function generates an absolutely continuous (w.r.t. the Lebesgue measure) invariant measure (w.r.t. the given chaotic map) and therefore the limiting function is the probability density function of the chaotic map. This fact can be used to determine the existence and estimate the probability density functions of chaotic biological systems.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - BSame topicMarine and environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207