MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Introduction to Monte Carlo for matrix models

2022· article· en· W3208255915 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics Lecture Notes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationGovernment of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsPython (programming language)LaptopMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceMatrix (chemical analysis)Applied mathematicsStatistical physicsRange (aeronautics)AlgorithmMathematicsPhysicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a wide range of matrix models and study them using the Monte Carlo technique in the large N limit. The results we obtain agree with exact analytic expressions and recent numerical bootstrap methods for models with one and two matrices. We then present new results for several unsolved multi-matrix models where no other tool is yet available. In order to encourage an exchange of ideas between different numerical approaches to matrix models, we provide programs in python that can be easily modified to study potentials other than the ones considered here. These programs were tested on a laptop and took between a few minutes to several hours to finish depending on the model, N, and the required precision.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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