Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the asymptotic properties of structured random matrices have attracted the attention of many experts involved in probability theory. In particular, R. Adamczak ( J. Theor. Probab. , Vol. 23, 2010) proved that, under fairly weak conditions, the squared spectral norms of large square Hankel matrices generated by independent identically distributed random variables grow with probability 1, as N ln( N ), where N is the size of a matrix. On the basis of these results, by using the technique and ideas of Adamczak’s paper cited above, we prove that, under certain constraints, the squared spectral norms of large rectangular Hankel matrices generated by linear stationary sequences grow almost certainly no faster than N ln( N ), where N is the number of different elements in a Hankel matrix. Nekrutkin ( Stat. Interface , Vol. 3, 2010) pointed out that this result may be useful for substantiating (by using series of perturbation theory) so-called “signal subspace methods,” which are often used for processing time series. In addition to the main result, the paper contains examples and discusses the sharpness of the obtained inequality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".