MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1809572497 · doi:10.1090/crmp/029/27

Blending two discrete integrability criteria: Singularity confinement and algebraic entropy

2001· book-chapter· en· W1809572497 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Lafortune, A. Ramani, B. Grammaticos, Yuichi Ohta, K. M. Tamizhmani

Bibliographic record

VenueCRM proceedings & lecture notes · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNonlinear Waves and Solitons
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgebraic numberSingularityMathematicsEntropy (arrow of time)Pure mathematicsApplied mathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We confront two integrability criteria for rational mappings. The first is the singularity confinement based on the requirement that every singularity, spontaneously appearing during the iteration of a mapping, disappear after some steps. The second recently proposed is the algebraic entropy criterion associated to the growth of the degree of the iterates. The algebraic entropy results confirm the previous findings of singularity confinement on discrete Painlevé equations. The degree-growth methods are also applied to linearisable systems. The result is that systems integrable through linearisation have a slower growth than systems integrable through isospectral methods. This may provide a valuable detector of not just integrability but also of the precise integration method. We propose an extension of the Gambier mapping in N dimensions. Finally a dual strategy for the investigation of the integrability of discrete systems is proposed based on both singularity confinement and the low growth requirement.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCRM proceedings & lecture notesSame topicNonlinear Waves and SolitonsFrench-language works237,207