MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510639651 · doi:10.14708/wm.v48i2.302

The Mathematical Legacy of Andrzej Lasota

2012· article· pl· W1510639651 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Mackey, Marta Tyran‐Kamińska, Hans-Oo Walther

Bibliographic record

VenueWiadomości Matematyczne · 2012
Typearticle
Languagepl
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professor Andrzej Lasota (1932–2006) was a Polish mathematician with wide ranging interests in dynamical systems, probability theory and ergodic theory who saw the inter-relationships between all three and who successfully synthesized these apparently disparate fields. He used that synthesis to both further mathematical research as well as to investigate problems in biology. One of his over-riding interests was the way in which seemingly “random” or “probabilistic” processes (in a mathematical sense) could actually be thought of as equivalently coming from deterministic dynamics. How did we each come to know him and his work? Michael C. Mackey met Lasota in Cracow in 1977 through his collaborator Dr. MariaWazewska-Czyzewska, a hematologist and daughter of Professor Tadeusz Wazewski. That meeting blossomed into an almost 30-year-long friendship and collaboration in biomathematics. Marta Tyran-Kaminska met Lasota during her mathematical studies at the University of Silesia in Katowice in 1992 and did her Ph.D. under his supervision. Hans-Otto Walther met Lasota during a year at Michigan State University, 1979–1980, where Pavel Brunovský was also visiting, and they had all been brought together by Shui-Nee Chow.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.276 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiadomości MatematyczneSame topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207