MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209992718 · doi:10.14288/1.0402626

Closest point methods with polyharmonic spline radial basis functions and local refinement

2021· article· en· W3209992718 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicDifferential Equations and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyharmonic splineThin plate splineMathematicsSpline (mechanical)Radial basis functionBasis (linear algebra)Point (geometry)Basis functionSmoothing splineMathematical analysisGeometryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSpline interpolationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Closest point methods are a class of embedding methods that have been used to solve partial differential equations on surfaces with the closest point representation of the surface. Recently, several studies replaced the standard Cartesian grid methods in the original Closest point methods with radial basis function generated finite differences. This reduces the computational cost and allows scattered and unstructured grids as well as locally refined uniform grids. This thesis uses the polyharmonic spline function as the radial basis function in the combined method which is different from the usual choice of Gaussian or multiquadric to avoid the shape parameter. We first perform convergence tests of the combined method. In all cases, the radial basis function closest point method uses fewer points in the embedding space while achieving a similar accuracy and convergence rate as the original closest point method. We then focus on solving partial differential equation problems with irregular grids that match features of the surface or the solution. These include using more points near high curvature regions or using more points near fine scale solution features. This can reduce the computational cost compared to using a uniform fine grid over the entire surface. Lastly, we provide an adaptive version of the combined method that is able to solve partial differential equation problems on surfaces when either or both of the surface features and problem features are changing 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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.236 · 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