MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244113138 · doi:10.23952/jnva.4.2020.1.06

Nesterov perturbations and projection methods applied to IMRT

2020· article· en· W4244113138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Esther Bonacker, Aviv Gibali, Karl‐Heinz Küfer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational Analysis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods for differential equations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProjection (relational algebra)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we use the simultaneous and cyclic subgradient projection methods with perturbations and apply them to linear and nonlinear optimization problems arising naturally in IMRT. The numerical results illustrate the mechanism of the perturbations and demonstrate that they lead to a significantly faster termination of the algorithm than the unperturbed projection methods, especially when the problem is ill-conditioned.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational AnalysisSame topicNumerical methods for differential equationsFrench-language works237,207