MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1930001340 · doi:10.1155/2015/461918

On Corrected Quadrature Rules and Optimal Error Bounds

2015· article· en· W1930001340 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstract and Applied Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicIterative Methods for Nonlinear Equations
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsQuadrature (astronomy)Peano axiomsTruncation errorApplied mathematicsTruncation (statistics)Weight functionFunction (biology)Degree (music)Taylor seriesMathematical analysisAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an analysis of corrected quadrature rules based on the method of undetermined coefficients and its associated degree of accuracy. The correcting terms use weighted values of the first derivative of the function at the endpoint of the subinterval in such a way that the composite rules contain only two new values. Using Taylor’s expansions and Peano’s kernels we obtain best truncation error bounds which depend on the regularity of the function and the weight parameter. We can minimize the bounds with respect to the parameter, and we can find the best parameter value to increase the order of the error bounds or, equivalently, the degree of accuracy of the rule.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.285 · 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