Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1990s saw vigorous activity in the mathematical theory of water waves by several independent international research groups, and in response we organised a mini-workshop in Oberwolfach in 2001 entitled Recent Developments in the Mathematical Theory of Water Waves. The 2001 meeting, which was devoted to the exact equations for water waves as written down by Euler, was a great success. A collection of papers originating at the meeting were published in a special issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society and lead to significant progress on certain famous and outstanding problems in water waves, particularly local existence and uniqueness, stability, three-dimensional waves, justification of model equations, convexity results for Stokes waves, and effective and accurate numerical schemes. In view of the interest in water waves generated by the 2001 meeting and our subsequent endeavours, it appeared timely to bring the various research groups together in another Oberwolfach workshop to intensify research in this subject. The following topics were chosen as priority research areas for the workshop since (i) they represent issues which have been almost fully settled for model equations, but remain almost fully open for the exact water-wave problem; and (ii) pose mathematical challenges whose resolution is likely to prove beneficial in a wide range of situations beyond the water-wave problem: Significant new results in these areas were reported at the conference and are summarised in the extended abstracts below. The workshop was attended by twenty-three researchers from eight countries; there was a good mix of researchers who had attended the 2001 meeting and those who had not, and a number of younger researchers new to this field attended. Twenty 45-minute talks were held in a friendly and informal atmosphere and, in true Oberwolfach spirit, many collaborative discussions took place.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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.
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".