MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798028937 · doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.06.026

KIOPS: A fast adaptive Krylov subspace solver for exponential integrators

2018· article· en· W2798028937 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Gaudreault, Greg Rainwater, Mayya Tokman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods for differential equations
Canadian institutionsGLS Industries (Canada)
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsKrylov subspaceOrthogonalizationSolverJacobian matrix and determinantMatrix exponentialExponential functionExponential integratorMathematicsGeneralized minimal residual methodApplied mathematicsLinear systemIntegratorSubspace topologyAlgorithmA priori and a posterioriMatrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceIterative methodMathematical analysisDifferential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new algorithm KIOPS for computing linear combinations of φ -functions that appear in exponential integrators. This algorithm is suitable for large-scale problems in computational physics where little or no information about the spectrum or norm of the Jacobian matrix is known a priori . We first show that such problems can be solved efficiently by computing a single exponential of a modified matrix. Then our approach is to compute an appropriate basis for the Krylov subspace using the incomplete orthogonalization procedure and project the matrix exponential on this subspace. We also present a novel adaptive procedure that significantly reduces the computational complexity of exponential integrators. Our numerical experiments demonstrate that KIOPS outperforms the current state-of-the-art adaptive Krylov algorithm phipm .

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations75
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational PhysicsSame topicNumerical methods for differential equationsFrench-language works237,207