MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382142160 · doi:10.1016/j.padiff.2023.100519

Galilei-invariant and energy-preserving extensions of Benjamin–Bona–Mahony-type equations

2023· article· en· W4382142160 on OpenAlexaff
Alexei F. Cheviakov, Denys Dutykh

Bibliographic record

VenuePartial Differential Equations in Applied Mathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNonlinear Waves and Solitons
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsConservation lawMathematicsMathematical physicsInvariant (physics)Homogeneous spaceIntegrable systemHamiltonian (control theory)Conservation of energyMathematical analysisKadomtsev–Petviashvili equationCamassa–Holm equationNonlinear systemBurgers' equationClassical mechanicsPartial differential equationPhysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classical Benjamin–Bona–Mahony equation (BBM equation) models unidirectional propagation of long gravity surface waves of small amplitude. Unlike many other water wave models, it lacks the Galilean invariance, which is an essential property of physical systems. It is shown that by an addition of a higher asymptotic order nonlinear term , this deficiency can be corrected, giving rise to a new Galilei invariant Benjamin–Bona–Mahony equation (iBBM equation). Moreover, further additional higher-order terms can be chosen in a way that the augmented model preserves the energy conservation property along with Hamiltonian and Lagrangian structures. The resulting equation is referred to as energy-preserving Benjamin–Bona–Mahony equation (eBBM). It is shown that both the classical BBM equation and the energy-preserving eBBM equations belong to a one-parameter ( α ) family that shares essentially the same local and nonlocal symmetries, conservation laws, Hamiltonian, and Lagrangian structures, with the BBM and eBBM equations corresponding to parameter values α = 0 and α = 1 , respectively. Symmetry and conservation law classifications reveal a special case α = 1 / 3 , which is shown to correspond to a rescaled version of the celebrated integrable Camassa–Holm (CH) equation. Local symmetries and conservation laws are computed, and numerical solution behaviour is compared for the three BBM-type modes and the CH-equivalent eBBM 1 / 3 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePartial Differential Equations in Applied MathematicsSame topicNonlinear Waves and SolitonsFrench-language works237,207