m‐NLP Inference Models Using Simulation and Regression Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current inference techniques for processing multi-needle Langmuir probe (m-NLP) data are often based on adaptations of the Orbital Motion-Limited (OML) theory which relies on several simplifying assumptions. Some of these assumptions, however, are typically not well satisfied in actual experimental conditions, thus leading to uncontrolled uncertainties in inferred plasma parameters. In order to remedy this difficulty, three-dimensional kinetic particle in cell simulations are used to construct a synthetic data set, which is used to compare and assess different m-NLP inference techniques. Using a synthetic data set, regression-based models capable of inferring electron density and satellite potentials from 4-tuples of currents collected with fixed-bias needle probes similar to those on the NorSat-1 satellite, are trained and validated. The regression techniques presented show promising results for plasma density inferences with RMS relative errors less than 20%, and satellite potential inferences with RMS errors less than 0.2 V for potentials ranging from -6 to -1 V. The new inference approaches presented are applied to NorSat-1 data, and compared with existing state-of-the-art inference techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".