MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170384143 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2fa8

Rare Event Sampling Improves Mercury Instability Statistics

2021· article· en· W3170384143 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dorian S. Abbot, Robert J. Webber, Sam Hadden, Darryl Z. Seligman, Jonathan Weare

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicScientific Research and Discoveries
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchNuclear Safety and Security CommissionYork UniversityOffice of ScienceNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRare eventsImportance samplingInstabilityEvent (particle physics)Monte Carlo methodMercury (programming language)QuantileSampling (signal processing)Statistical physicsStatisticsComputer scienceMeteorologyEconometricsMathematicsPhysicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to the chaotic nature of planetary dynamics, there is a non-zero probability that Mercury’s orbit will become unstable in the future. Previous efforts have estimated the probability of this happening between 3 and 5 billion years in the future using a large number of direct numerical simulations with an N -body code, but were not able to obtain accurate estimates before 3 billion years in the future because Mercury instability events are too rare. In this paper we use a new rare-event sampling technique, Quantile Diffusion Monte Carlo (QDMC), to estimate that the probability of a Mercury instability event in the next 2 billion years is approximately 10 −4 in the REBOUND N -body code. We show that QDMC provides unbiased probability estimates at a computational cost of up to 100 times less than direct numerical simulation. QDMC is easy to implement and could be applied to many problems in planetary dynamics in which it is necessary to estimate the probability of a rare event.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicScientific Research and DiscoveriesFrench-language works237,207