Rigorous numerics for NLS: Bound states, spectra, and controllability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyse the performance of direct solvers when applied to a system of linear equations arising from an $h$-adapted, $C^0$ finite element space. Theoretical estimates are derived for typical $h$-refinement patterns arising as a result of a point, edge, or face singularity as well as boundary layers. They are based on the elimination trees constructed specifically for the considered grids. Theoretical estimates are compared with experiments performed with MUMPS using the nested-dissection algorithm for construction of the elimination tree from METIS library. The numerical experiments provide the same performance for the cases where our trees are identical with those constructed by the nested-dissection algorithm, and worse performance for some cases where our trees are different. We also present numerical experiments for the cases with mixed singularities, where how to construct optimal elimination trees is unknown. In all analysed cases, the use of $h$-adaptive grids significantly reduces the cost of the direct solver algorithm $per$ $unknown$ as compared to uniform grids. The theoretical estimates predict and the experimental data confirm that the computational complexity is linear for various refinement patterns. In most cases, the cost of the direct solver $per$ $unknown$ is lower when employing anisotropic refinements as opposed to isotropic ones.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".