MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415351738 · doi:10.1080/10618600.2025.2574535

Computationally Efficient Algorithms for Simulating Isotropic Gaussian Random Fields on Graphs with Euclidean Edges

2025· article· en· W4415351738 on OpenAlexaff
Alfredo Alegría, Xavier Emery, Tobia Filosi, Emilio Porcu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsL'Alliance Boviteq
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y TecnológicoAgencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo
KeywordsRandom fieldEfficient algorithmEuclidean geometryGaussianRandom graphIsotropyGaussian random field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work addresses the problem of simulating Gaussian random fields that are continuously indexed over a class of metric graphs, termed graphs with Euclidean edges, being more general and flexible than linear networks. We introduce three general algorithms that allow to reconstruct a wide spectrum of random fields having a covariance function that depends on a specific metric, called resistance metric, and proposed in recent literature. The algorithms are applied to a synthetic case study consisting of a street network. They prove to be fast and accurate in that they reproduce the target covariance function and provide random fields whose finite-dimensional distributions are approximately Gaussian.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational and Graphical StatisticsSame topicPoint processes and geometric inequalitiesFrench-language works237,207