MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028738842

Geometric Deep Learning for Electrostatics and Magnetostatics Problems

2024· dissertation· en· W7028738842 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsDeep learningMagnetostaticsElectrostaticsCalculus (dental)Artificial neural network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional numerical methods such as the Finite Element Method (FEM) and Finite Difference Method (FDM) have been employed to solve electrostatics and magnetostatics problems involving Partial Differential Equations (PDEs).With the recent boom in deep learning, alternative ways to solve such PDEs subject to boundary value constraints have been proposed and implemented, in contrast to classical numerical solvers.One such entity is a Graph Neural Network (GNN), which precisely depicts the internodal connectivity in a graph structure comprising nodes and edges.At the structural level, a GNN is analogous to the tessellations (here, triangular simplices) of a finite element mesh.This thesis investigates the prediction quality of a GNN model with spectral graph convolution, to learn and approximate the solution for a time-independent, boundary value problem in the domains of electrostatics and magnetostatics.This network is trained in a supervised manner on datasets generated by a FEM solver with diverse shapes and charge/current non-uniformities.For the given datasets and the GNN framework, experimental results demonstrate that introducing mesh augmentations i.e., structural variations in the finite element meshes, enhance GNN predictions over unseen geometries and inhomogeneities, in comparison to commonly used regularization techniques.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207