MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534940407

Compactly epi-Lipschitzian convex sets and functions in normed spaces

2000· article· en· W1534940407 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan M. Borwein, Yves Lucet, Boris S. Mordukhovich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSubspace topologyCodimensionPure mathematicsRegular polygonConvex analysisConvex functionBoundary (topology)ConvexityMathematical analysisConvex optimizationGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. We provide several characterizations of compact epi-Lipschitzness for closed convex sets in normed vector spaces. In particular, we show that a closed convex set is compactly epi-Lipschitzian if and only if it has nonempty relative interior, finite codimension, and spans a closed subspace. Next, we establish that all boundary points of compactly epi-Lipschitzian sets are proper support points. We provide the corresponding results for functions by using inf-convolutions and the Legendre--Fenchel transform. We also give an application to constrained optimization with compactly epi-Lipschitzian data via a generalized Slater condition involving relative interiors. R' esum' e. Plusieurs caract'erisations de la propri'et'ee d"epi-Lipschitz compactit 'e sont prouv'ees pour les ensembles convexes ferm'es dans un espace vectoriel norm'e. En particulier, nous prouvons qu'un ensemble convexe ferm'e est compactement 'epi-Lipschitz si, et seulement si, il a un int'erieur relatif non vide, une co...

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations51
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Variational AnalysisFrench-language works237,207