MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323041987 · doi:10.18280/mmep.100144

Modified Secant Method for Reduction in Number of Iterations

2023· article· en· W4323041987 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicIterative Methods for Nonlinear Equations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReduction (mathematics)MathematicsSecant methodApplied mathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationNewton's methodGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study considers an updated solution for an improved secant method.The study presents certain changes to improve the existing method with given conditions for the roots of the non-linear equation where f(x)=0 and the function is continuous.Here an improved method has been developed that starts with the basic secant method, and after considering these conditions, an efficient solution is obtained.This modified method will increase the convergence rate faster than the standard secant method by performing a few iterations.The present solution confirmed that the proposed method is effective compared to the standard secant method.The present work developed based on additional conditions derived from the standard secant method and is responsible for reducing the number of iterations.

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.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.240 · 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