MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766248777 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.09356

Sparse Grid Discretizations based on a Discontinuous Galerkin Method

2017· preprint· en· W2766248777 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander Atanasov, Erik Schnetter

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaYale University
KeywordsSparse gridDiscretizationCurse of dimensionalityGridPartial differential equationDiscontinuous Galerkin methodApplied mathematicsSparse approximationGalerkin methodComputer scienceScalar (mathematics)Sparse matrixMathematical optimizationCode (set theory)MathematicsAlgorithmMathematical analysisPhysicsFinite element methodGeometryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine and extend Sparse Grids as a discretization method for partial differential equations (PDEs). Solving a PDE in $D$ dimensions has a cost that grows as $O(N^D)$ with commonly used methods. Even for moderate $D$ (e.g. $D=3$), this quickly becomes prohibitively expensive for increasing problem size $N$. This effect is known as the Curse of Dimensionality. Sparse Grids offer an alternative discretization method with a much smaller cost of $O(N \log^{D-1}N)$. In this paper, we introduce the reader to Sparse Grids, and extend the method via a Discontinuous Galerkin approach. We then solve the scalar wave equation in up to $6+1$ dimensions, comparing cost and accuracy between full and sparse grids. Sparse Grids perform far superior, even in three dimensions. Our code is freely available as open source, and we encourage the reader to reproduce the results we show.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational MathematicsFrench-language works237,207