Using Matrix Differential Equations for Solving Systems of Linear Algebraic Equations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various ordinary differential equations of the first order have recently been used by the author for the solution of general, large linear systems of algebraic equations. Exact solutions were derived in terms of a new kind of infinite series of matrices which are truncated and applied repeatedly to approximate the solution. In these matrix series, each new term is obtained from the preceding one by multiplication with a matrix which becomes better and better conditioned tending to the identity matrix. Obviously, this helps the numerical computations. For a more efficient computation of approximate solutions of the algebraic systems, we consider new differential equations which are solved by simple techniques of numerical integration. The solution procedure allows to easily control and monitor the magnitude of the residual vector at each step of integration. A related iterative method is also proposed. The solution methods are flexible, permitting various intervening parameters to be changed whenever necessary in order to increase their efficiency. Efficient computation of a rough approximation of the solution, applicable even to poorly conditioned systems, is also performed based on the alternate application of two different types of minimization of associated functionals. A smaller amount of computation is needed to obtain an approximate solution of large linear systems as compared to existing methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".