Efficient Parameters Estimation Method for the Separable Nonlinear Least Squares Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we combine the special structure of the separable nonlinear least squares problem with a variable projection algorithm based on singular value decomposition to separate linear and nonlinear parameters. Then, we propose finding the nonlinear parameters using the Levenberg–Marquart (LM) algorithm and either solve the linear parameters using the least squares method directly or by using an iteration method that corrects the characteristic values based on the L-curve, according to whether or not the nonlinear function coefficient matrix is ill posed. To prove the feasibility of the proposed method, we compared its performance on three examples with that of the LM method without parameter separation. The results show that (1) the parameter separation method reduces the number of iterations and improves computational efficiency by reducing the parameter dimensions and (2) when the coefficient matrix of the linear parameters is well-posed, using the least squares method to solve the fitting problem provides the highest fitting accuracy. When the coefficient matrix is ill posed, the method of correcting characteristic values based on the L-curve provides the most accurate solution to the fitting problem.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".