Hi,

may ask you if parameters 1-4 correspond (in order) to M,T,C,Fe at page 8 of the linked paper (doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.07.029) ?

Thank you in advance !

Best Regards,

Leo

Hi,

may ask you if parameters 1-4 correspond (in order) to M,T,C,Fe at page 8 of the linked paper (doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.07.029) ?

Thank you in advance !

Best Regards,

Leo

Hello Leo,

Sorry, but the parameters we left the parameters unnamed on purpose to provide more of a challenge. That being said, the Guan and Novosselov (2019) paper is an excellent resource for Stage 2. Best of luck.

Team Xeek

i find it quite impossible to do without knowing the meaning of the parameters.

i already find the analytic form of the potential function and can fit exactly the train data using my own parameterization. i cannot use the 4 parameters provided. Does anyone have any hints?

more importantly, i find that the potential curve in train sample 0 and train sample 1 are exactly the same. But their parameters are different. This shows that the train parameterization provided is perhaps not unique ?

2 Likes

In this case that is not possible to build a model without the understanding of underlaid physics.

hengcherkeng235 if you don’t mind sharing some resources that you used (if any) to have a better understanding of stage 2 that would be greatly appreciated. I find Guan and Novosselov (2019) paper too difficult for someone without background on this topic.

Thanks for your comment. We wanted Stage 1 and Stage 2 to be more of a learning about PDEs and the Poisson-Boltzmann equation, but clearly, we are frustrating users. Please look for an update to Stage 2 next week to help unblock you.

Team Xeek

We need to solve a PDE with boundary conditions. So we need the actual PDE (Eq??? in the paper from your stage2 notebook) and the boundary conditions? p1, p2, p3, p4? What is the point in us trying to guess what you want us to do? Could you just say it clearly?

Thanks for communicating your frustration. We are preparing an update for later this week that will be announced here and on the main page for Stage 2.

Could you please check on your scoring side? If I submit all zeros, the score is 0.3301466. If one edge is set with your voltages (boundary condition), then the score is 0.331151. The score is RMSE, so it should be lower/better since the boundary conditions are known. I tried +/- voltage. Did you give us the correct test file voltages?