MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926344539 · doi:10.1049/cje.2018.02.001

Chaos Criteria Design Based on Modified Sign Functions with One or Three‐Threshold

2019· article· en· W2926344539 on OpenAlexaff
Senlin Wu, Yaotian Li, Wenshi Li, Lei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Electronics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicChaos control and synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChaoticSign (mathematics)Trigonometric functionsPlot (graphics)SineRecurrence plotMathematicsLorenz systemMetric (unit)Lyapunov exponentComputer scienceApplied mathematicsNonlinear systemMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complexity measures of chaotic or periodic signals are perpetual topics of interest to data scientists. This work adheres to the framework of the traditional 0-1 test for chaos and replaces sine and cosine functions by modified sign functions. The compressive mapping rules chosen are one-threshold of three-value or three-threshold of five-value. In new criteria for chaos in forms of the 3s plot and Ks metric compared with 0-1 test results, the periodic state of data features a short beeline instead of a big ring in the pq plot and signs the nearest zero mark, while the chaotic state signs a simple curve instead of a random-walking shape in the pq plot, and shows the nearest one mark. By computing the Lorenz equation evolution under the contrast tests of the Poincare section and Lyapunov index, we visualize a new chaoscriteria design in symbolic dynamics and data compression principles, and our work may lay the foundation for further expressing the chaotic appearance of novel signals deep into future brainets.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of ElectronicsSame topicChaos control and synchronizationFrench-language works237,207