MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393970826 · doi:10.1002/9781119763222.ch14

Method of Weighted Averages (Mosig–Michalski Extrapolation Algorithm)

2024· other· en· W4393970826 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtrapolationAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter introduces method of weighted averages (WA) which is currently known to be the most robust approach to evaluation of the Sommerfeld integrals (SIs). By mid-2010s WA approach reached maturity with extensive engineering literature available and practical implementations becoming easily attainable. It provides detailed derivations of identities foundational to the WA method and gives explanations for their use. The chapter describes the weighted average algorithm in its basic (single-level) form. Fast and accurate way to compute SIs is by using the partition-extrapolation method, which is an integration-then-summation method used in conjunction with an extrapolation method. Convergence of the sequence resulting from application of the partition and extrapolation method to evaluation of the Sommerfeld integral tails is classified for both the case of non-zero and zero radial distances.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207