MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782602001 · doi:10.5555/3242181.3242281

Optimizations for neuron time warp(NTW) for stochastic reaction-diffusion models of neurons

2017· article· en· W2782602001 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Nazrul, Ishlam Patoary, Carl Tropper, Robert A. McDougal, William W. Lytton

Bibliographic record

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputationDiscrete event simulationNeuronAlgorithmStochastic processStochastic simulationEvent (particle physics)DiffusionWork (physics)SimulationBiological systemMathematicsPhysicsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intracellular calcium signaling pathways of a neuron consist of biochemical reactions along with molecular diffusion. It is known that stochastic discrete event simulation of these pathways provides a more detailed understanding of the pathways than deterministic simulators because they capture behavior at a molecular level. Our research employs a parallel discrete event simulation simulator, Neuron Time Warp (NTW), which is intended for use for the simulation of neurons. In previous work we built a discrete event Ca2+ wave model. However, we did not achieve the expected performance because of an imbalance in the computation between the area of the neuron covered by the Ca2+ wave and the remaining area of the neuron. In this paper we describe a dynamic load balancing algorithm and a dynamic window control algorithm for NTW. We make use of Q-learning to determine the basic parameters of the algorithm. Using this algorithm we obtained an improvement in the performance of the simulator of up to 30%.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
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 venueWinter Simulation ConferenceSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207