Scientific Computation - Science topic

From many data, situations, examples, etc., it is clear that generative artificial intelligence (AI) technology significantly supports scientific research at every stage of its implementation, from concept design to the development of results. In the preparation phase of research projects, generative AI can help analyze scientific literature quickly and comprehensively. Natural language processing algorithms make it possible to search for relevant publications, identify key trends in the literature and pinpoint research gaps. This allows researchers to create more precise research questions and legitimate hypotheses, which is crucial to the quality and value of research. But does generative artificial intelligence technology help research mainly in terms of processing large data sets in a relatively short period of time, or is it also helpful in many other issues of ongoing scientific research? And how about the ethics and objectivity of conducting scientific research? Does generative artificial intelligence technology help with these issues as well?

I described the key issues of opportunities and threats to the development of artificial intelligence technology in my article below:

Please write what you think in this issue? Do you see rather threats or opportunities associated with the development of artificial intelligence technology?

And what is your opinion on this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

I would like to invite you to join me in scientific cooperation,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Hello fellow researchers and devs. First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the time to participate in this discussion.

Based on your experience of programming with Python, which IDE do you currently prefer for programming with Python?

In my case and after testing other IDE's for Python like VScode, right now I am using a lot of the Spyder IDE for Python 3, mostly for its quick feedback at the time of experimentation and amazing collaborative github community.

So I would like to know your preferred Python IDE.

Regards.

International scientific cooperation plays an important role in the development of science and scientific research. In recent years, the development of online knowledge bases, online indexing databases of scientific publications, online science portals facilitates the development of international scientific cooperation. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the scale of remote communication conducted via the Internet increased significantly. The scale of realization of scientific conferences and symposia remotely through online video conferencing platforms has increased. With online science portals enabling discussions, the development of scientific cooperation on an international scale has been facilitated. Thanks to the aforementioned online science portals, i.e. this Research Gate portal, it is possible to set up and operate international research teams, where researchers and scientists operating in different countries can conduct collaborative scientific research, exchange experiences from their research, jointly publish the results of their research work in scientific articles and monographs. I hereby inform you that I am open to scientific cooperation, including scientific cooperation carried out internationally. I invite you to publish the results of the conducted scientific research in a scientific journal:

"International Journal of Legal Studies" (ISSN 2543-7097):

Legal sciences, normative aspects of various issues, various issue described in normative terms:

Publisher: International Institute of Innovation "Science - Education - Development" in Warsaw

"International Journal of Legal Studies" is a scientific journal published semi-annually (semiannual). After the publication of each issue of the journal, all articles are posted in a number of databases for indexing of scientific publications in the formula of open access. This significantly increases the visibility of articles on the Internet and translates into higher citability.

I invite you to join me in scientific cooperation.

I invite you to contact me by email: darprokop111@gmail.com

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

By now, we've all realised how well GPT AI is able to find and replicate patterns in language and in 2D images. Its ability to find and interact with data patterns sometimes allows it to answer questions better than some students.

I expect that right now there will be teams training GPT installations with molecular structure and physical characteristics data to try to find candidates for new materials for high-temperature superconductors, or to find organic lattice structures with high hydrogen affinity to replace palladium for hydrogen storage cells. The financial and social rewards for success in these areas make it difficult to justify NOT trying out GPT AI.

But what about fundamental physics theory? Could AI find a solution to the current mismatch between Einstein's general relativity and quantum mechanics? Could it start to solve hard problems that have defeated mainstream academia for decades? If so, what happens to the instiutions?

Further reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_pre-trained_transformer

Industry 4.0 technologies, including Big Data Analytics technology, are used in multi-criteria processing, analyzing large data sets. The technological advances taking place in the field of ICT information technology make it possible to apply analytics carried out on large sets of data on various aspects of the activities of companies, enterprises and institutions operating in different sectors and branches of the economy.

Before the development of ICT information technologies, IT tools, personal computers, etc. in the second half of the 20th century as part of the 3rd technological revolution, computerized, partially automated processing of large data sets was very difficult or impossible. As a result, building multi-criteria, multi-article, big data and information models of complex structures, simulation models, forecasting models was limited or impossible. However, the technological advances made in the current fourth technological revolution and the development of Industry 4.0 technology have changed a lot in this regard. More and more companies and enterprises are building computerized systems that allow the creation of multi-criteria simulation models within the framework of so-called digital twins, which can present, for example, computerized models that present the operation of economic processes, production processes, which are counterparts of the real processes taking place in the enterprise. An additional advantage of this type of solution is the ability to create simulations and study the changes of processes fictitiously realized in the model after the application of certain impact factors and/or activation, materialization of certain categories of risks. When large sets of historical quantitative data presenting changes in specific factors over time are added to the built multi-criteria simulation models within the framework of digital twins, it is possible to create complex multi-criteria forecasting models presenting potential scenarios for the development of specific processes in the future. Complex multi-criteria processes for which such forecasting models based on computerized digital twins can be built include climatic, natural, social, economic, pandemic, etc. processes, which can be analyzed as the environment of operating specific companies, enterprises and institutions.

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,

What do you think about it?

What's your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Hello everyone,

I am looking for links of Mexican datasets that can be used in classification tasks in machine learning. Preferably the datasets have been exposed in scientific journals.

Thank you for your attention and valuable support.

Regards,

Cecilia-Irene Loeza-Mejía

There is probably no other science portal that would offer all the same functions for researchers as the Research Gate portal.

Do you agree with me on the above matter?

In the context of the above issues, I am asking you the following question:

Please reply

I invite you to the discussion

Thank you very much

Best wishes

Dear Friends and Colleagues from RG,

I wish You all the best in the New Year. I wish you a successful continuation and successes in scientific work, achieving interesting results of scientific research in the New Year 2019 and I also wish you good luck in your personal life, all the best.

In the New Year, I wish You success in personal and professional life, fulfillment of plans and dreams, including successes in scientific work, All Good.

In the ending year, we often ask ourselves:

Have we successfully implemented our research plans in the ending year? We usually answer this question that a lot has been achieved, that some of the plans a year ago have been realized, but not all goals have been achieved.

I wish You that the Next Year would be much better than the previous ones, that each of us would also achieve at least some of the planned most important goals to be achieved in personal, professional and scientific life.

I wish You dreams come true regarding the implementation of interesting research, I wish You fantastic results of research and effective development of scientific cooperation.

I wish You effective development of scientific cooperation, including international scientific cooperation, implementation of interesting research projects within international research teams and that the results of scientific research are appreciated, I wish You awards and prizes for achievements in scientific work.

I wish You many successes in scientific work, in didactic work and in other areas of your activity in the New Year, and I also wish you health, peace, problem solving, prosperity in your personal life, all the best.

Thank you very much.

Best wishes.

I wish you the best in New Year 2019.

Dariusz Prokopowicz

I need to multiply the inverse of a matrix A to another matrix B. If B were to be a vector, I would simply solve a linear system Ax = B to get the product x=inv(A)B. With B being a matrix, I don't know the most efficient way|method to compute inv(A)B.

Kindly share your experience.

I couldn't see any options to show complete axes of 3D plot in MATLAB software ?

There is option to tick Box. But it doesn't covers top axes in

In which areas of science are adequate research carried out by research teams, and in which areas, scientific disciplines are research conducted by researchers more often? Do you know fields, disciplines in which research is usually conducted by research teams? Do team research projects have specific attributes that generate additional added value or do they have an advantage over research conducted individually by scientists?

Do you agree with me on the above matter?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply.

I invite you to discussion and scientific cooperation.

Thank you very much.

Best wishes.

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Could there be nonlinear ODEs that could not even be solved numerically?

I am working on a third-order nonlinear problem which is giving accurate results for a given set of initial conditions (ICs) but for other ICs the matlab ODE solver (checked 4-5 algorithms) do not converge.

How can we define “infinite” and “finite” if we agree with the idea and the operations in Cantor's proofs that many infinite sets in mathematics actually can be proved (turned into) finite set-------the elements in real number set are never-be-finished, endless, limitless and they are really infinite while those in natural number set are sure-be-finished, ended, limited and they are actually finite?

This conundrum has disclosed two infinite related fundamental defects in present infinite set theory and mathematical analysis:

（1）the theoretical and practical confusions of “finite--infinite” caused by the theoratical and practical confusions of “potential infinite, actual infinite”;

（2）the absence of systematic “scientific carrier theory” and the absence of systematic “infinite related number spectrum and set spectrum”.

Because of the absence of systematic “scientific carrier theory”, in present infinite theory system (The First Generation of Infinite Theory System) basing on “potential infinite, actual infinite”, people have had to use the unscientific “potential infinite, actual infinite” theory for the quantitative cognitions of those “finite--infinite” related mathematical things since antiquity. And, because all the “infinite related concepts and contents” for quantitative cognizing in our mathematics have been being unscientifically defined as “non—infinite infinite, finite infinite, infinite finite, both finite and infinite, number of non-number, ...” in present infinite theory system, no one is able to know clearly when and where they should be “finite or infinite, number or non-number, ...” and why. This situation is not only unable us to cognize scientifically two concepts of “finite, infinite” and the relationship between them, but also unable us to cognize scientifically three contents of “finite mathematical things, potential infinite mathematical things, actual infinite mathematical things” and the relationship among them in present infinite related mathematical fields------very free and arbitrary when dealing with any “infinite related mathematical things”. So, many suspended infinite related paradox families have been produced inevitably. It is because of such fatal fundamental defects that results in the frequently performings of the mathematical version of Andersen's THE EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES Fairy Tale in all infinite related mathematical fields ever since “potential infinite, actual infinite” came into our science and mathematics, the only thing most people are able to do is just echoing in earnest to what the authorities said.

In new infinite theory system basing on the new concepts of "abstract infinite law and carriers of abstract infinite law " (The Second Generation of Infinite Theory System), the concepts of “finite, infinite, finite scientific carrier, infinite scientific carrier” have been clearlly and scientifically defined. “Infinite” is a kind of “invisible and intangible abstract scientific law”, it is a scientific (mathematical) content for qualitative but not quantitative studies and cognizings; while the “abstract scientific infinite law carriers" is a kind of “visible and tangible scientific concrete manifestation (entity) of abstract scientific law”, it is a scientific (mathematical) content specially fot quantitative studies and cognizings. In our science, we can only conduct the quantitative studying and cognizing on the “abstract scientific law carriers" but not on the “abstract scientific law". Basing on new infinite theory system, now we are perfectly justifiable to construct a systematic and scientific “theory of infinite related mathematical carriers" and able to conduct quantitative studying and cognizing on all kinds of “infinite related mathematical carriers" scientifically (such as their computations as well as the comparetions among them). The quantitative related systematic and scientific “theory of carriers" decides that we must have quantitative studies and cognizings on “different infinite law carriers, big (small) infinite law carriers, bigger (smaller) infinite law carriers, more bigger (more smaller) infinite law carriers, ..." but not on “different infinite laws, big (small) infinite laws, bigger (smaller) infinite laws, more bigger (more smaller) infinite laws, ..." or even arbitrarily on the “finite—infinite mixing up things” as what have been done in presentmathematical analysis and set theory (such as taking them as finite things first then as infinite things later or taking them as infinite things first then as finite things later or the elements belonging to an infinite set but being impossible to exist in this very infinite set, ...). So, in the Second Generation of Set Theory, it is impossible at all to have such contents as “the infinite of more infinite, more more infinite, more more more infinite, ... super infinite, super super infinite, super super super infinite, super super super super infinite, ...”; All the mathematical contents of “X--->0, Y--->📷, ...” for quantitative cognizing in our new infinite related mathematical analysis and set theory are the “scientific carriers" with clear and scientific quantitative natures and definitions in new systematic and scientific “infinite related number spectrum (number system) and set spectrum (set system)”. The replacement of “potential infinite, actual infinite” concepts by new "abstract infinite law and carriers of abstract infinite law" concepts in present infinite theory system and the development of systematic “theory of scientific carriers” inevitably result in great theoretical and operational reformations (a revolution) in the quantitative--quantitative studies and cognizings in our infinite related science areas and, eliminate scientifically and thoroughly the suspended conundrums of “’potential infinite, actual infinite’ confusing" and “’finit--infinite’ confusing" since antiquity.

We are currently building a medical prediction platform (Evidencio) for researchers and physicians to facilitate translation of scientific articles to medical practice (www.evidencio.com). Evidencio is a platform created for and by scientists/physicians that allows for easy external validation of prediction models as well as conversion to easy-to-use online calculators for everyday practice. 

Which (type of) prediction models would be most usefull for you to add to the platform? And, as a researcher/physician, would you be interested in adding your own prediction model to the platform?  

With the continuing funding cuts in some countries, if your work is primarily computational or theoretical in nature could you successfully be an independent scientist? Are there limitations in trying to get your work published in this situation? Will science become more like journalism and are we looking at the prospect of freelance scientists?

I have written codes for generating series of patterns using matlab. I want to save the images generated in each loop indexed with the looping variable. I tried concatenation of strings but it shows error.

We would like to connect such oscillator circuits together to excite or inhibit other threshold oscillator circuits.

Some works in the literature (Goldberg/Bridges, for instance) have demonstrated that standard Genetic Algorithms (GAs) usually cause the building blocks disruption of the solutions. On the other hand, some current papers have shown that the use of a GA special implementation may be a viable alternative in order to overcome this issue. In this sense, I would like to know what you think about that. Please, try answering my question in a short clear response if possible.

Thank you very much in advance!

Hi All, I have difficulty in writing a mix of string and string arrays  by FORTRAN, for example (the following two lines):

write (cout,1052) (cd(ii),ii=1+1,9),(cy(ib),ib=10,(inmt*2))

1052 format ('c=[c1',8(';c',a1),79(';c',a2),'];')

this piece of code is working, where cd(ii) and cy(ib) are string arrays. 

I need to write variable number of the string arrays cells (cy(ib)) followed by a bracket, so I need to replace "79" in the format line with "(inmt*2)-9", because each case has a different number of cells to be written, when I do that, it is not anymore working.

Any ideas please?

Thanks,

The development of correlations for computing the critical velocity required for avoiding sedimentation in two phase liquid-solids in pipes under pressure was subject of many studies since several decades ago. However, the simultaneous effects of particles size and its distribution, concentration and density of solid particles, liquid viscosity, diameter and slope of upward pipes in turbulent flows look globally a complex issue. What are the possible approaches for these phenomena? New approaches, pertinent references and particularly any pertinent summary about the state of art in this field will be appreciated.

It has been shown that WENO-Z is less dissipative than WENO-JS.

Are the conclusion and numerical results hold in the attached article if one replaces the baseline 

WENO-JS scheme with WENO-Z scheme and that Compact Reconstructed WENO scheme is stiill substantially faster and more accurate than the pure WENO-Z scheme?  How about for a higher order scheme, say 9th order WENO schemes?

Note, please take the sensitivity parameter epsilon = O(dx^3) and power parameter p=2 in the definition of WENO-Z nonlinear weights.

For reference, see my list of publications on WENO-Z scheme.

I am currently working on a complex network in MATLAB2010b because we have the license in the college for it only but it only allows execution on 8 cores. I am a little familiar with Scilab but on one of the page (http://julialang.org/) comparing octave, matlab, julia,python etc.(except Scilab), octave was significantly slower than matlab. But what is the execution speed of running a program in scilab. Can anyone suggest me, some sample parallelised code in Scilab as its website lacks comprehensive information on its usage?

Also, can anyone suggest how to read about julia with example codes as its very fast among others?

Execution time is between one or two months using i7 processor with four cores for a Gaussian 09 job that contains more than 50 heavy atoms. Is there any way to reduce this time? And how much the reduction can be? What is the alternative without sacrificing accuracy (method and basis vectors)?

I have lots of experience using Java, C and FORTRAN for scientific programming. In Java I make heavy use of abstract classes, interfaces and generics to make my code as re-usable as possible. This has really cut down my development overhead without having too much impact on runtime. I have yet to experiment with hardware acceleration such as that offered by Cuda, which other use to good advantage, in my scientific programming (quantum dynamics of open/stochastic systems). Working mainly on Mac's the emergence of Swift and Metal provide new opportunities for scientific programming in a modern environment with fast execution.

I have started to play with Swift and it seems promising - with the playground looking like a potentially good teaching too for my students.

Especially from those who have experience using hardware acceleration and have benchmarked some relevant simple Swift+Metal code (e.g. matrix multiplication). I would be grateful for information of your experience or opinions on the future potential of Swift+Metal for high performance scientific simulation.

I am currently fitting an ITC curve that fits to the two sites model. I curious why the N1 number is always bigger than the N2. What I've got at the moment is that the N1 is 0.999 while the N2 is 0.768. I suppose those numbers should be 1. What does this means

Has anybody experienced small scale scientific HPC using Amazon EC2?

I currently lack decent HPC support at my work, and for that, I am considering to use Amazon's EC2 services, possibly spot instance services.

For the work in my lab, I occasionally (perhaps a number of times a month) need to compute *typically independent) tasks on up to max. 100 nodes that run for a couple of days, typically using torque grid system/c++/matlab etc. I am wondering how costs / ease of use compare to buying and running a couple of 4/8core blades in the closet around the corner...

(And yes, I am aware of Amazon's budget calculator; however, I didn't find its answers very useful.)

I have a FORTRAN source code consisting of many different .F and .h files. How to create a makefile to compile these files?

I have a program that calculates temperatures using finite elemento methods, but I haven't considering using sparse matrix, all my calculations considers matrix as dense. Does anyone know some good sources that I can use to implement a sparse matrix?