MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294991726 · doi:10.11159/htff22.173

A Modified Preconditioning Approach for Nodal Integral Method

2022· article· en· W4294991726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nadeem Ahmed, Alok Kumar, Niteen Kumar, Suneet Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNODALComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nodal Integral Methods (NIM) are numerical methods which solves partial differential equations in quite efficient and accurate manner. The available conventional methods such as Finite Difference Method (FDM) or Finite Volume Methods (FVM) need very fine mesh compared to NIM to attain the same level of accuracy. The high accuracy of NIM is due to the use of semi analytic solutions of approximate ODEs for each node in the mesh. In spite of significant merits over other methods, the prevailing use of NIM is limited only for linear or weakly nonlinear problems. Recently, some efforts have been made to extend the application of NIM for higher non-linearity by using Jacobian-Free Newton Krylov (JFNK) approach which is an efficient implementation of the Newton method. A Preconditioning algorithm of JFNK is given for Burger's equation in both dimension in 1D and 2D, but the work was not extended for higher nonlinearity because of the singularities in the coefficients at higher Reynolds numbers. In the present study, some modifications in the coefficients are given to extend the algorithm for relatively high nonlinearity compared to earlier work. The numerical results are compared with the analytical solution to demonstrate the accuracy of the proposed algorithm. Furthermore, the spectral analysis is performed to test the eigenvalues clustering ability of the proposed algorithm.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207