MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195982168 · doi:10.3934/dcds.2022033

Dynamically learning the parameters of a chaotic system using partial observations

2022· article· en· W3195982168 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Carlson, Joshua Hudson, Adam Larios, Vincent R. Martinez, Eunice Ng, Jared P. Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChaoticObservableComputer scienceNonlinear systemLorenz systemConvergence (economics)Applied mathematicsAlgorithmDynamical systems theoryData assimilationState (computer science)Dynamical system (definition)Estimation theoryMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by recent progress in data assimilation, we develop an algorithm to dynamically learn the parameters of a chaotic system from partial observations. Under reasonable assumptions, we supply a rigorous analytical proof that guarantees the convergence of this algorithm to the true parameter values when the system in question is the classic three-dimensional Lorenz system. Such a result appears to be the first of its kind for dynamical parameter estimation of nonlinear systems. Computationally, we demonstrate the efficacy of this algorithm on the Lorenz system by recovering any proper subset of the three non-dimensional parameters of the system, so long as a corresponding subset of the state is observable. We moreover probe the limitations of the algorithm by identifying dynamical regimes under which certain parameters cannot be effectively inferred having only observed certain state variables. In such cases, modifications to the algorithm are proposed that ultimately result in recovery of the parameter. Lastly, computational evidence is provided that supports the efficacy of the algorithm well beyond the hypotheses specified by the theorem, including in the presence of noisy observations, stochastic forcing, and the case where the observations are discrete and sparse in time.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscrete and Continuous Dynamical SystemsSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207