MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1828296157 · doi:10.4995/agt.2002.2111

All hypertopologies are hit-and-miss

2002· article· en· W1828296157 on OpenAlexaff
Somshekhar Naimpally

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied General Topology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topology and Set Theory
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspaceMathematicsNetwork topologyComparison of topologiesTopology (electrical circuits)Metric spaceTopological spaceHausdorff distanceGeneral topologyCompact-open topologyDiscrete mathematicsWeak topology (polar topology)CombinatoricsExtension topologyPure mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisFunctional analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>We solve a long standing problem by showing that all known hypertopologies are hit-and-miss. Our solution is not merely of theoretical importance. This representation is useful in the study of comparison of the Hausdorff-Bourbaki or H-B uniform topologies and the Wijsman topologies among themselves and with others. Up to now some of these comparisons needed intricate manipulations. The H-B uniform topologies were the subject of intense activity in the 1960's in connection with the Isbell-Smith problem. We show that they are proximally locally finite topologies from which the solution to the above problem follows easily. It is known that the Wijsman topology on the hyperspace is the proximal ball (hit-and-miss) topology in”nice” metric spaces including the normed linear spaces. With the introduction of a new far-miss topology we show that the Wijsman topology is hit-and-miss for all metric spaces. From this follows a natural generalization of the Wijsman topology to the hyperspace of any T<sub>1</sub> space. Several existing results in the literature are easy consequences of our work.</p>

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied General TopologySame topicAdvanced Topology and Set TheoryFrench-language works237,207