MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1672544085 · doi:10.4171/jfg/41

Dimensions of graphs of prevalent continuous maps

2016· preprint· en· W1672544085 on OpenAlexaff
Richárd Balka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fractal Geometry Mathematics of Fractals and Related Topics · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHungarian Scientific Research Fund
KeywordsCombinatoricsUncountable setMathematicsHausdorff dimensionGraphPacking dimensionMetric spaceCompact spaceDimension (graph theory)Discrete mathematicsMinkowski–Bouligand dimensionFractal dimensionFractalCountable setMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let K be an uncountable compact metric space and let C(K,\mathbb{R}^d) denote the set of continuous maps f\colon K \to \mathbb{R}^d endowed with the maximum norm. The goal of this paper is to determine various fractal dimensions of the graph of the prevalent f\in C(K,\mathbb{R}^d) . As the main result of the paper we show that if K has finitely many isolated points then the lower and upper box dimension of the graph of the prevalent f\in C(K,\mathbb{R}^d) are \underline {\mathrm {dim}}_B K+d and \overline{\mathrm {dim}}_B K+d , respectively. This generalizes a theorem of Gruslys, Jonušas, Mijovic, Ng, Olsen, and Petrykiewicz. We prove that the packing dimension of the graph of the prevalent f\in C(K,\mathbb{R}^d) is \mathrm {dim}_P K+d , generalizing a result of Balka, Darji, and Elekes. Balka, Darji, and Elekes proved that the Hausdorff dimension of the graph of the prevalent f\in C(K,\mathbb{R}^d) equals \mathrm {dim}_H K+d . We give a simpler proof for this statement based on a method of Fraser and Hyde.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fractal Geometry Mathematics of Fractals and Related TopicsSame topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207