Bibliographic record
Abstract
We prove that for integers <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="q greater-than 1 comma m greater-than-or-equal-to 1"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mo>></mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> <mml:mo> ≥ </mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">q>1,m\geq 1</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> and positive rationals <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="r 1 comma r 2 comma midline-horizontal-ellipsis comma r Subscript m Baseline not-equals q Superscript j Baseline comma j equals 1 comma 2 comma midline-horizontal-ellipsis comma"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mo> ⋯ </mml:mo> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> </mml:msub> <mml:mo> ≠ </mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mo> ⋯ </mml:mo> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">r_1,r_2,\cdots ,r_m\neq q^j,j=1,2,\cdots ,</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> the series <disp-formula content-type="math/mathml"> \[ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="sigma-summation Underscript j equals 1 Overscript normal infinity Endscripts StartFraction q Superscript negative j Baseline Over left-parenthesis 1 minus q Superscript negative j Baseline r 1 right-parenthesis left-parenthesis 1 minus q Superscript negative j Baseline r 2 right-parenthesis midline-horizontal-ellipsis left-parenthesis 1 minus q Superscript negative j Baseline r Subscript m Baseline right-parenthesis EndFraction"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:munderover> <mml:mo> ∑ </mml:mo> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal"> ∞ </mml:mi> </mml:munderover> <mml:mfrac> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo> ⋯ </mml:mo> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>q</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo> − </mml:mo> <mml:mi>j</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> </mml:mfrac> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\sum _{j=1}^\infty \frac {q^{-j}}{\left ( 1-q^{-j}r_1\right ) \left ( 1-q^{-j}r_2\right ) \cdots \left ( 1-q^{-j}r_m\right ) }</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> \] </disp-formula> is irrational. Furthermore, if all the positive rationals <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="r 1 comma r 2 comma midline-horizontal-ellipsis comma r Subscript m Baseline"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mm
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".