MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995731991 · doi:10.1142/s0218127408022226

LIMIT CYCLE BIFURCATIONS IN NEAR-HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS BY PERTURBING A NILPOTENT CENTER

2008· article· en· W1995731991 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

VenueInternational Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNilpotentMathematicsBifurcationLimit cycleInfinite-period bifurcationSaddle-node bifurcationTranscritical bifurcationBifurcation diagramLimit (mathematics)Hamiltonian systemHamiltonian (control theory)Mathematical analysisHopf bifurcationBifurcation theoryCenter (category theory)Pitchfork bifurcationPure mathematicsPhysicsNonlinear systemQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As we know, Hopf bifurcation is an important part of bifurcation theory of dynamical systems. Almost all known works are concerned with the bifurcation and number of limit cycles near a nondegenerate focus or center. In the present paper, we study a general near-Hamiltonian system on the plane whose unperturbed system has a nilpotent center. We obtain an expansion for the first order Melnikov function near the center together with a computing method for the first coefficients. Using these coefficients, we obtain a new bifurcation theorem concerning the limit cycle bifurcation near the nilpotent center. An interesting application example & a cubic system having five limit cycles & is also presented.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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