MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255350394 · doi:10.1080/1063719021000042347

A parallel divide and conquer algorithm for non symmetric tridiAgonal toeplitz systems using conjugate gradient

2002· article· en· W4255350394 on OpenAlexaff
L.E. Garey, R.E. Shaw, J. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueParallel algorithms and applications · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTridiagonal matrixToeplitz matrixConjugate gradient methodDivide and conquer algorithmsMathematicsTransposeDiagonalTridiagonal matrix algorithmBiconjugate gradient methodBand matrixMatrix (chemical analysis)Positive-definite matrixAlgorithmComplex conjugateSymmetric matrixApplied mathematicsConjugate residual methodComputer scienceSquare matrixMathematical analysisPure mathematicsGradient descentGeometryEigenvalues and eigenvectors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the application of the conjugate gradient method specifically to solve non symmetric systems which are large, tridiagonal and Toeplitz. Under the condition that the system is diagonally dominant, one can pre-multiply the system by the transpose of the coefficient matrix and take advantage of the structure of the new coefficient matrix to perturb and factor it. This allows us to divide the task of solution containing pairs of tridiagonal, symmetric and Toeplitz systems and to solve the pairs of systems using a parallel implementaton of congujate gradient. Final corrections, to account for the perturbations, provide a numerical approximation to the solution.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParallel algorithms and applicationsSame topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207