MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180251254 · doi:10.23967/coupled.2021.011

Combining Coupled Skorokhod SDE and Lattice Gas Frameworks for Multi-fidelity Modelling of Complex Behavioral Systems

2021· article· en· W3180251254 on OpenAlexafffund
Thi Kim Thoa Thieu, Roderick Melnik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónBasque Center for Applied MathematicsEusko JaurlaritzaMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsStochastic differential equationComputer scienceComplex systemFidelityMonte Carlo methodStatistical physicsBounded functionStochastic processPopulationParticle systemMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To model reliably behavioral systems with complex bio-social interactions, accounting for uncertainty quantification, is critical for many application areas. However, in terms of the mathematical formulation of the corresponding problems, one of the major challenges is coming from the fact that corresponding stochastic processes should, in most cases, be considered in bounded domains, possibly with obstacles. This has been known for a long time and yet, very little has been done for the quantification of uncertainties in modelling complex behavioral systems described by such stochastic processes. In this paper, we address this challenge by considering a coupled system of Skorokhodtype stochastic differential equations (SDEs) describing interactions between active and passive participants of a mixed-population group. In developing a multi-fidelity modelling methodology for such behavioral systems, we combine lowand high-fidelity results obtained from (a) the solution of the underlying coupled system of SDEs and (b) simulations with a statistical-mechanics-based lattice gas model, where we employ a kinetic Monte Carlo procedure. Furthermore, we provide representative numerical examples of healthcare systems, subject to an epidemic, where the main focus in our considerations is given to an interacting particle system of asymptomatic and susceptible populations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.433
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.075 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207