MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400691832 · doi:10.1007/s00332-024-10054-2

Turing Bifurcation in the Swift–Hohenberg Equation on Deterministic and Random Graphs

2024· article· en· W4400691832 on OpenAlexafffund
Georgi S. Medvedev, Dmitry E. Pelinovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nonlinear Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks Stability and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSwiftMathematicsBifurcationRandom graphDiscrete mathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsNonlinear systemGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Swift–Hohenberg equation (SHE) is a partial differential equation that explains how patterns emerge from a spatially homogeneous state. It has been widely used in the theory of pattern formation. Following a recent study by Bramburger and Holzer (SIAM J Math Anal 55(3):2150–2185, 2023), we consider discrete SHE on deterministic and random graphs. The two families of the discrete models share the same continuum limit in the form of a nonlocal SHE on a circle. The analysis of the continuous system, parallel to the analysis of the classical SHE, shows bifurcations of spatially periodic solutions at critical values of the control parameters. However, the proximity of the discrete models to the continuum limit does not guarantee that the same bifurcations take place in the discrete setting in general, because some of the symmetries of the continuous model do not survive discretization. We use the center manifold reduction and normal forms to obtain precise information about the number and stability of solutions bifurcating from the homogeneous state in the discrete models on deterministic and sparse random graphs. Moreover, we present detailed numerical results for the discrete SHE on the nearest-neighbor and small-world graphs.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicNeural Networks Stability and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207