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 OpenAlexaff
Alex Shiu Lun Chu

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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

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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicDifferential Equations and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207