MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962811440 · doi:10.1142/s1793962313420087

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF HIGH-INDEX DAE FOR PROCESS SIMULATION

2013· article· en· W2962811440 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Complex Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModeling and Simulation Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphProcess (computing)Differential (mechanical device)Differential algebraic equationComputer scienceFunction (biology)Differential equationPosition (finance)Reduction (mathematics)Index (typography)MathematicsMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematical analysisOrdinary differential equationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deals with the structural analysis problem of dynamic lumped process high-index differential algebraic equations (DAE) models. The existing graph theoretical method depends on the change in the relative position of underspecified and overspecified subgraphs and has an effect to the value of the differential index for complex models. In this paper, we consider two methods for index reduction of such models by differentiation: Pryce's method and the symbolic differential elimination algorithm rifsimp. They can remedy the above drawbacks. Discussion and comparison of these methods are given via a class of fundamental process simulation examples. In particular, the efficiency of Pryce's method is illustrated as a function of the number of tanks in process design. Moreover, a range of nontrivial problems are demonstrated by the symbolic differential elimination algorithm and fast prolongation.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.301 · 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