MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deterministic Numeric Simulation and Surrogate Models with White and Black Machine Learning Methods: A Case Study on Inverse Mappings

2020· article· en· W3120457970 on OpenAlexaff
Julio J. Valdés, Alain Tchagang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack boxComputer scienceSurrogate modelInverse problemEmulationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRange (aeronautics)Partial differential equationMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The approximation and emulation of first principles based deterministic models are important problems in science, engineering, industrial processes, design, digital twining and other tasks. Usually these are complex systems described by partial differential/integral equations, with a broad range of initial and boundary conditions. Finding solutions is often computationally costly and time consuming. Surrogate models have been useful for constructing approximations that effectively replace the complex and costly original models. Statistical and computational intelligence based techniques have been effective for creating surrogate models, such as neural networks, support vector machines and boosted trees (labeled black box techniques). This paper approaches the problem of finding surrogate models aimed at solving inverse problems for deterministic systems described by a partial differential equation. This situation, often intractable when using first principles methods, is illustrated with a case study of heat transfer in a rectangular space. Unsupervised methods are used for gaining insight into the properties of the input/output state spaces and supervised approaches, composed of white (explainable), black box modeling methods and ensembles, explore the feasibility of retrieving the input from the system's outputs. For most input variables accurate inverse models were obtained, demonstrating the effectiveness of machine learning approaches for this 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207