MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971833212 · doi:10.1090/s0025-5718-06-01830-8

Limiting set of second order spectra

2006· article· en· W1971833212 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lyonell Boulton

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Computation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSpectral Theory in Mathematical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesPacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
KeywordsMathematicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsHilbert spaceInvertible matrixMultiplicity (mathematics)Subspace topologyCombinatoricsLimitingOrder (exchange)Truncation (statistics)Spectrum (functional analysis)Spectral lineGeneralityMathematical analysisPure mathematicsStatisticsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let M M be a self-adjoint operator acting on a Hilbert space H \mathcal {H} . A complex number z z is in the second order spectrum of M M relative to a finite-dimensional subspace L ⊂ Dom ⁡ M 2 \mathcal {L}\subset \operatorname {Dom} M^2 iff the truncation to L \mathcal {L} of ( M − z ) 2 (M-z)^2 is not invertible. This definition was first introduced in Davies, 1998, and according to the results of Levin and Shargorodsky in 2004, these sets provide a method for estimating eigenvalues free from the problems of spectral pollution. In this paper we investigate various aspects related to the issue of approximation using second order spectra. Our main result shows that under fairly mild hypothesis on M , M, the uniform limit of these sets, as L \mathcal {L} increases towards H \mathcal {H} , contain the isolated eigenvalues of M M of finite multiplicity. Therefore, unlike the majority of the standard methods, second order spectra combine nonpollution and approximation at a very high level of generality.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics of ComputationSame topicSpectral Theory in Mathematical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207