MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1923061459 · doi:10.1515/gmj.2001.377

On Convergence of Series of Random Elements via Maximal Moment Relations with Applications to Martingale Convergence and to Convergence of Series with <i>p</i>-Orthogonal Summands

2001· article· en· W1923061459 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Rosalsky, Andrei Volodin

Bibliographic record

VenueGeorgian Mathematical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsMartingale (probability theory)Banach spaceMartingale difference sequenceSequence (biology)Pure mathematicsWeak convergenceUnconditional convergenceRate of convergenceSeries (stratigraphy)Type (biology)Discrete mathematicsMathematical analysisApplied mathematicsCompact convergenceKey (lock)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The rate of convergence for an almost surely convergent series of Banach space valued random elements is studied in this paper. As special cases of the main result, known results are obtained for a sequence of independent random elements in a Rademacher type p Banach space, and new results are obtained for a martingale difference sequence of random elements in a martingale type p Banach space and for a p-orthogonal sequence of random elements in a Rademacher type p Banach space. The current work generalizes, simplifies, and unifies some of the recent results of Nam and Rosalsky [Teor. Īmovīr. ta Mat. Statist. 52: 120–131, 1995] and Rosalsky and Rosenblatt [Bull. Inst. Math. Acad. Sinica 11: 185–208, 1983, Nonlinear Anal. 30: 4237–4248, 1997].

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeorgian Mathematical JournalSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207