MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389442330 · doi:10.1137/23m155582x

Stability of the Nonwandering Set in the Region of Attraction Boundary under Perturbations with Application to Vulnerability Assessment

2023· article· en· W4389442330 on OpenAlexaff
Michael W. Fisher, Ian A. Hiskens

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDivision of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems
KeywordsAttractionBoundary (topology)Set (abstract data type)Vulnerability (computing)Stability (learning theory)Computer scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisMachine learningComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. For many engineered systems it is important to assess vulnerability to potential disturbances in order to ensure reliable operation. Whether the system will recover from a particular finite-time disturbance to a desired stable equilibrium point depends on uncertain and time-varying system parameter values. Therefore, it is valuable to determine, for specific fixed disturbances, the margins for safe operation: the smallest change in parameter values that would cause the system to become vulnerable to the disturbance. The natural setting for this problem is a parameter-dependent vector field with a family of stable equilibria and a parameter-dependent initial condition representing the disturbance. The system recovers for a particular parameter value if its initial condition lies within the region of attraction of the desired stable equilibrium point. Prior work has developed algorithms for numerically computing the margins for safe operation. However, the theoretical guarantees provided for these methods require a very restrictive assumption: that the nonwandering set in the region of attraction boundary is stable under perturbations to the vector field. This assumption is generally intractable to verify, so feasibility of the above algorithms cannot be determined in advance, and even when these algorithms do converge their convergence to the correct values cannot be guaranteed. Thus, this assumption limits the effective application of these algorithms in practice. This work relaxes this restrictive assumption while still obtaining similar results under weaker assumptions, thereby guaranteeing effectiveness of these algorithms. For the setting under consideration, it is shown for vector fields on compact Riemannian manifolds that the restrictive assumption follows immediately and does not need to be independently verified. A motivating example shows that this is not the case for vector fields on Euclidean space, but in this setting it is shown that the restrictive assumption can still be relaxed provided there exist a neighborhood of infinity with suitable properties and some additional generic assumptions. These results are then used to provide theoretical guarantees for the numerical algorithms discussed above under far weaker assumptions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical SystemsSame topicAdvanced Differential Equations and Dynamical SystemsFrench-language works237,207