MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105207807

Swarm equilibria in domains with boundaries

2018· article· en· W3105207807 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSwarm behaviourComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis involves the study of a well-known swarming model with interaction and external potentials in one and two dimensions. We refer to this model as the plain aggregation model and later study the model with nonlinear diffusion, so-called the diffusive model here. Typically set in free space, one of the novelties of this thesis is the study of such swarming models in the presence of a boundary. We consider a no-flux boundary condition enforced in a particle context via a ``slip'' condition. Of particular relevance to the context of this thesis, the swarming model used here can be formulated as an energy gradient flow and thusly, one might expect equilibrium states to be minima of the energy. In this work we demonstrate, through both analytical and numerical investigations, a continuum of equilibria of the plain aggregation model that are not minima of the energy. Furthermore, we show that these non-minimizing equilibria are achieved dynamically from a non-trivial set of initial conditions with a variety of interaction potentials and boundary geometries. Thus we show conclusively a deficiency with the plain aggregation model in domains with boundaries, namely that it appears to evolve into equilibria that are not minima of the energy. Following this we then propose a rectification to this deficiency in way of nonlinear diffusion. This choice of nonlinear diffusion is especially attractive because it preserves compact states of the plain aggregation model. We showcase how the diffusive model approaches, but does not equilibrate at, the non-minimizing equilibria of the plain aggregation model. Furthermore we demonstrate how minimizers of the diffusive model do approach minimizers of the plain aggregation model in the zero diffusion limit.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207