MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109089832 · doi:10.1017/s0962492920000045

Fast algorithms using orthogonal polynomials

2020· article· en· W3109089832 on OpenAlexaff
Sheehan Olver, Richard Mikaël Slevinsky, Alex Townsend

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Numerica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthogonal polynomialsMathematicsQuadrature (astronomy)Clenshaw–Curtis quadratureGauss–Kronrod quadrature formulaOrthogonalityGauss–Jacobi quadratureClassical orthogonal polynomialsAlgorithmApplied mathematicsDiscrete orthogonal polynomialsAlgebra over a fieldGaussian quadratureNyström methodIntegral equationMathematical analysisPure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review recent advances in algorithms for quadrature, transforms, differential equations and singular integral equations using orthogonal polynomials. Quadrature based on asymptotics has facilitated optimal complexity quadrature rules, allowing for efficient computation of quadrature rules with millions of nodes. Transforms based on rank structures in change-of-basis operators allow for quasi-optimal complexity, including in multivariate settings such as on triangles and for spherical harmonics. Ordinary and partial differential equations can be solved via sparse linear algebra when set up using orthogonal polynomials as a basis, provided that care is taken with the weights of orthogonality. A similar idea, together with low-rank approximation, gives an efficient method for solving singular integral equations. These techniques can be combined to produce high-performance codes for a wide range of problems that appear in applications.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations48
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa NumericaSame topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207