MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1554478671

The Local Limit Theorem: A Historical Perspective

2005· article· en· W1554478671 on OpenAlexaff
David McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Iranian Statistical Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentral limit theoremMathematicsFermat's Last TheoremLimit (mathematics)Bernoulli's principleRegular primePicard–Lindelöf theoremLaplace transformBinomial theoremCarlson's theoremFundamental theoremCalculus (dental)Brouwer fixed-point theoremDiscrete mathematicsDanskin's theoremMathematical analysisFixed-point theoremStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The local limit theorem describes how the density of a sum of random variables follows the normal curve. However the local limit theorem is often seen as a curiosity of no particular importance when compared with the central limit theorem. Nevertheless the local limit theorem came first and is in fact associated with the foundation of probability theory by Blaise Pascal and Pierre de Fermat and was originally formalized by Jakob Bernoulli, Abraham DeMoivre and Pierre-Simon Laplace. Here we describe the historical roots of the local limit theorem. We describe how it was supplanted by the central limit theorem in applications. Then we review the revival started by B. V. Gnedenko and we describe modern developments.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Iranian Statistical SocietySame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207