On the reproducibility of fully convolutional neural networks for modeling time–space-evolving physical systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reproducibility of a deep-learning fully convolutional neural network is evaluated by training several times the same network on identical conditions (database, hyperparameters, and hardware) with nondeterministic graphics processing unit operations. The network is trained to model three typical time–space-evolving physical systems in two dimensions: heat, Burgers’, and wave equations. The behavior of the networks is evaluated on both recursive and nonrecursive tasks. Significant changes in models’ properties (weights and feature fields) are observed. When tested on various benchmarks, these models systematically return estimations with a high level of deviation, especially for the recurrent analysis which strongly amplifies variability due to the nondeterminism. Trainings performed with double floating-point precision provide slightly better estimations and a significant reduction of the variability of both the network parameters and its testing error range.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it