MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898148020 · doi:10.1115/pvp2018-84767

Effects of Non-Normal Input Distributions and Sampling Region on Monte Carlo Results

2018· article· en· W2898148020 on OpenAlexaff
Konstantinos Tsembelis, Seyun Eom, John C. Jin, Christopher J. Cole

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodProbabilistic logicComputer scienceBounding overwatchImportance samplingProbabilistic analysis of algorithmsSampling (signal processing)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to address the risks associated with the operation of ageing pressure boundary components, many assessments incorporate probabilistic analysis tools for alleviating excessive conservatism of deterministic methodologies. In general, deterministic techniques utilize conservative bounding values for all critical parameters. Recently, various Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics (PFM) codes have been employed to identify governing parameters which could affect licensing basis margins of pressure retaining components. Moreover, these codes are used to calculate a probability of failure in order to estimate potential risks under operating and design loading conditions for the pressure retaining components experiencing plausible and active degradation mechanisms. Probabilistic approaches typically invoke the Monte-Carlo (MC) method where a set of critical input variables are randomly distributed and inserted in deterministic computer models. Estimates of results from probabilistic assessments are then compared against various assessment criteria. During the PVP-2016 conference, we investigated the assumption of normality of the Monte Carlo results utilizing a non-linear system function. In this paper, we extend the study by employing non-normal input distributions and investigating the effects of sampling region on the system function.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207