A sequential sampling method for adaptive metamodeling using data with highly nonlinear relation between input and output parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Metamodeling is an effective method to approximate the relations between input and output parameters when significant efforts of experiments and simulations are required to collect the data to build the relations. This paper aims to develop a new sequential sampling method for adaptive metamodeling by using the data with highly nonlinear relation between input and output parameters. Design/methodology/approach In this method, the Latin hypercube sampling method is used to sample the initial data, and kriging method is used to construct the metamodel. In this work, input parameter values for collecting the next output data to update the currently achieved metamodel are determined based on qualities of data in both the input and output parameter spaces. Uniformity is used to evaluate data in the input parameter space. Leave-one-out errors and sensitivities are considered to evaluate data in the output parameter space. Findings This new method has been compared with the existing methods to demonstrate its effectiveness in approximation. This new method has also been compared with the existing methods in solving global optimization problems. An engineering case is used at last to verify the method further. Originality/value This paper provides an effective sequential sampling method for adaptive metamodeling to approximate highly nonlinear relations between input and output parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".