MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410975913 · doi:10.1107/s1600576725003334

Enhanced estimation method for partial scattering functions in contrast variation small-angle neutron scattering via Gaussian process regression with prior knowledge of smoothness

2025· article· en· W4410975913 on OpenAlexaff
Ippei Obayashi, Shinya Miyajima, Kazuaki Tanaka, Koichi Mayumi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Crystallography · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersFusion Oriented REsearch for disruptive Science and TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsScatteringSmoothnessKrigingGaussian processGaussianRegressionNeutron scatteringPartial least squares regressionSmall-angle scatteringMathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsOpticsStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contrast variation small-angle neutron scattering (CV-SANS) is a powerful tool for evaluating the structure of multi-component systems. In CV-SANS, the scattering intensities I ( Q ) measured with different scattering contrasts are decomposed into partial scattering functions S ( Q ) of the self- and cross-correlations between components. Since the measurement has a measurement error, S ( Q ) must be estimated statistically from I ( Q ). If no prior knowledge about S ( Q ) is available, the least-squares method is best, and this is the most popular estimation method. However, if prior knowledge is available, the estimation can be improved using Bayesian inference in a statistically authorized way. In this paper, we propose a novel method to improve the estimation of S ( Q ), based on Gaussian process regression using prior knowledge about the smoothness and flatness of S ( Q ). We demonstrate the method using synthetic core–shell and experimental polyrotaxane SANS data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.272
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied CrystallographySame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207