MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283593031 · doi:10.11159/ffhmt22.175

Bayesian Belief Network Analysis of a Large Eddy Simulated Ocean Turbulence Field

2022· article· en· W4283593031 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicholas V. Scott, Tobias Kulkulka

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass Transfer · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceField (mathematics)Bayesian probabilityComputer scienceStatistical physicsMeteorologyPhysicsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An observational space Bayesian belief network analytical formulism is applied to a sub-grid modeled turbulent kinetic energy (tke) field emanating from ocean turbulence large eddy simulation (LES) data containing Langmuir cells but no breaking waves. The purpose of the analysis is to illustrate how statistical machine learning modeling can be used to understand the probabilistic structure of observational space which is needed in demonstrating how the allied latent space can be related statistically to it for the purpose of data generation. The Peter and Clark (PC)-algorithm-based Bayesian belief network (BBN) edge-nodal structure for the observational-space tke subdomains demonstrates a distinctive nonlocal connectivity pattern when the multidimensional scaling graph layout is invoked. When the Chow-Liu algorithm is used, a different tree-based connectivity in the network is revealed. In particular, a dominant parental root node occupies the far upper left region in the observational-space domain with many edge connections flowing toward the right. Quantification of linkage strength through the BBNs provides a way to understand the spatial covariance of observational space subdomains providing hints as to the physically relevant statistical inferential model.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... International Conference on Fluid Flow, Heat and Mass TransferSame topicReservoir Engineering and Simulation MethodsFrench-language works237,207