MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280508996 · doi:10.1063/5.0086926

Predicting waves in fluids with deep neural network

2022· article· en· W4280508996 on OpenAlexafffund
Indu Kant Deo, Rajeev K. Jaiman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAutoencoderDeep learningBenchmark (surveying)Convolutional neural networkPhysicsRecurrent neural networkArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceGeneralizationAlgorithmNetwork architectureRepresentation (politics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a deep learning technique for data-driven predictions of wave propagation in a fluid medium. The technique relies on an attention-based convolutional recurrent autoencoder network (AB-CRAN). To construct a low-dimensional representation of wave propagation data, we employ a denoising-based convolutional autoencoder. The AB-CRAN architecture with attention-based long short-term memory cells forms our deep neural network model for the time marching of the low-dimensional features. We assess the proposed AB-CRAN framework against the standard recurrent neural network for the low-dimensional learning of wave propagation. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the AB-CRAN model, we consider three benchmark problems, namely, one-dimensional linear convection, the nonlinear viscous Burgers equation, and the two-dimensional Saint-Venant shallow water system. Using the spatial-temporal datasets from the benchmark problems, our novel AB-CRAN architecture accurately captures the wave amplitude and preserves the wave characteristics of the solution for long time horizons. The attention-based sequence-to-sequence network increases the time-horizon of prediction compared to the standard recurrent neural network with long short-term memory cells. The denoising autoencoder further reduces the mean squared error of prediction and improves the generalization capability in the parameter space.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations35
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207