MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733489173 · doi:10.1002/nme.5601

Goal‐oriented adaptivity using unconventional error representations for the multidimensional Helmholtz equation

2017· article· en· W2733489173 on OpenAlexafffund
Vincent Darrigrand, Ángel Rodríguez‐Rozas, Ignacio Muga, David Pardo, Albert Romkes, Serge Prudhomme

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y TecnológicoAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónMinisterio de Ciencia y TecnologíaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadBasque Center for Applied MathematicsEusko JaurlaritzaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Operator (biology)Helmholtz equationBounded functionApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceApproximation errorUpper and lower boundsMathematicsFocus (optics)Helmholtz free energyAlgorithmMathematical analysisBoundary value problem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In goal‐oriented adaptivity, the error in the quantity of interest is represented using the error functions of the direct and adjoint problems. This error representation is subsequently bounded above by element‐wise error indicators that are used to drive optimal refinements. In this work, we propose to replace, in the error representation, the adjoint problem by an alternative operator. The main advantage of the proposed approach is that, when judiciously selecting such alternative operator, the corresponding upper bound of the error representation becomes sharper, leading to a more efficient goal‐oriented adaptivity. While the method can be applied to a variety of problems, we focus here on two‐ and three‐dimensional (2‐D and 3‐D) Helmholtz problems. We show via extensive numerical experimentation that the upper bounds provided by the alternative error representations are sharper than the classical ones and lead to a more robust p‐adaptive process. We also provide guidelines for finding operators delivering sharp error representation upper bounds. We further extend the results to a convection‐dominated diffusion problem as well as to problems with discontinuous material coefficients. Finally, we consider a sonic logging‐while‐drilling problem to illustrate the applicability of the proposed method.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational MathematicsFrench-language works237,207