MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949299135 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1208.4870

Numerical solution of the Optimal Transportation problem using the Monge-Ampere equation

2012· preprint· en· W2949299135 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐David Benamou, Brittany D. Froese, Adam M. Oberman

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicDifferential Equations and Boundary Problems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonge–Ampère equationStencilMathematicsLaplace's equationSolverConvergence (economics)Partial differential equationBoundary value problemApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisElliptic partial differential equationBiharmonic equationGridMathematical optimizationGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical method for the solution of the elliptic Monge-Ampere Partial Differential Equation, with boundary conditions corresponding to the Optimal Transportation (OT) problem is presented. A local representation of the OT boundary conditions is combined with a finite difference scheme for the Monge-Ampere equation. Newton's method is implemented leading to a fast solver, comparable to solving the Laplace equation on the same grid several times. Theoretical justification for the method is given by a convergence proof in the companion paper (Benamou et al., 2012). In this paper, the algorithm is modified to a simpler compact stencil implementation and details of the implementation are given. Solutions are computed with densities supported on non-convex and disconnected domains. Computational examples demonstrate robust performance on singular solutions and fast computational times.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.142 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicDifferential Equations and Boundary ProblemsFrench-language works237,207