MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211136048 · doi:10.1201/9781003188339-72

The fast multipole method for the computation of large-scale three-dimensional elastostatics boundary-element problems in underground excavations

2021· book-chapter· en· W4211136048 on OpenAlexaff
H. Wahanik, S. Moallemi, J.H. Curran, Thamer Yacoub, Brent T. Corkum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsRocscience (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFast multipole methodMultipole expansionBoundary element methodComputationComputational scienceComputer scienceMatrix (chemical analysis)Boundary (topology)Collocation (remote sensing)Range (aeronautics)Finite element methodApplied mathematicsAlgorithmMathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisStructural engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the theoretical and computational implementation of an original version of the Fast Multipole Method (FMM) for solving large-scale problems in 3D elastostatics based on the indirect boundary integral fictitious formulation. The conventional boundary element method with N collocation nodes, translates into solving a dense and non-symmetric system of equations, with computational complexity O(N2). Additionally, for large models, storing the system’s matrix in random-access memory (RAM) is intractable, requiring storing sections of the matrix in hard disk. This creates an important burden towards computational cost. The FMM is inspired on the intuitive idea of collecting influences (e.g., gravitational, electromagnetic, acoustic, elastic) from close sources into a single source, using approximations with the flavor of a Taylor expansion. We illustrate the power of the method applied in computing 3D elastostatics models for real-world excavations, running within Rocscience modelling software, where important speed-ups were observed for a wide range of models ranging from 100K up to 1M elements.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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 topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207