MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401827640 · doi:10.3389/frai.2024.1401782

Exploring artificial intelligence techniques to research low energy nuclear reactions

2024· review· en· W4401827640 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anasse Bari, Tanya Pushkin Garg, Tai-Wei Wu, Sneha Singh, David J. Nagel

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityAnthropocene InstituteGeorge Washington University
KeywordsComputer scienceLatent Dirichlet allocationData sciencePopulationEnergy (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceTopic modelPhysicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world urgently needs new sources of clean energy due to a growing global population, rising energy use, and the effects of climate change. Nuclear energy is one of the most promising solutions for meeting the world's energy needs now and in the future. One type of nuclear energy, Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), has gained interest as a potential clean energy source. Recent AI advancements create new ways to help research LENR and to comprehensively analyze the relationships between experimental parameters, materials, and outcomes across diverse LENR research endeavors worldwide. This study explores and investigates the effectiveness of modern AI capabilities leveraging embedding models and topic modeling techniques, including Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), BERTopic, and Top2Vec, in elucidating the underlying structure and prevalent themes within a large LENR research corpus. These methodologies offer unique perspectives on understanding relationships and trends within the LENR research landscape, thereby facilitating advancements in this crucial energy research area. Furthermore, the study presents LENRsim, an experimental machine learning tool to identify similar LENR studies, along with a user-friendly web interface for widespread adoption and utilization. The findings contribute to the understanding and progression of LENR research through data-driven analysis and tool development, enabling more informed decision-making and strategic planning for future research in this field. The insights derived from this study, along with the experimental tools we developed and deployed, hold the potential to significantly aid researchers in advancing their studies of LENR.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.538
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.020 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Artificial IntelligenceSame topicComputational and Text Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207