MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986267468 · doi:10.1109/scored.2011.6148777

Golden Ratio, the Phi, and Its Geometrical Substantiation

2011· article· en· W1986267468 on OpenAlexaff
M. Akhtaruzzaman, Amir Akramin Shafie, Sharif Md. Rakibul Raihan, Mohammad Kamrul Hasan, Tanveer Ahsan, Md Shafiul Alam, Md. Bahlul Haider

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Theories and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGolden ratioIrrational numberRelation (database)Key (lock)ArchitectureThe RenaissancePaintingConstant (computer programming)MathematicsComputer scienceCalculus (dental)GeometryArt historyArtVisual artsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Golden ratio is often denoted by the Greek letter, usually in lower case, Phi (φ) which is an irrational mathematical constant, approximately 1.6180339887. Because of its unique and interesting properties, many mathematicians as well as renaissance artists and architects studied, documented and employed golden section proportions in remarkable works of sculpture, painting and architecture. Robot sizing especially for the Humanoid Robot, Phi is considered as the key to achieve the human friendly look. The ratio also plays an enigmatic role in the geometry and mathematics. The basic concept of golden ratio and its relation with the geometry are represented and described in this paper. The paper also explains about the structure and construction strategies of various dynamic rectangles by establishing some relations and dependencies with each other. The main contribution of the paper is to study about the validation and substantiation of the Equation of Phi based on classical geometric relations. The technique can be considered as an interesting strategy to prove the Equation of Phi.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Mathematical Theories and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207