MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013927575 · doi:10.1137/100812483

Monotonicity of Perturbed Tridiagonal $M$-Matrices

2012· article· en· W2013927575 on OpenAlexafffund
Jie Huang, Ronald D. Haynes, Ting‐Zhu Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMolecular spectroscopy and chirality
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTridiagonal matrixMathematicsRank (graph theory)Monotonic functionToeplitz matrixTridiagonal matrix algorithmApplied mathematicsMatrix (chemical analysis)InverseLinear algebraCombinatoricsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A well-known property of an $M$-matrix is that its inverse is elementwise nonnegative, which we write as $M^{-1} \geq 0$. In a previous paper [Linear Algebra Appl., 434 (2011), pp. 131--143], we gave sufficient bounds on single element perturbations so that monotonicity persists for a perturbed tridiagonal $M$-matrix. Here we extend these results, presenting the actual maximum upper bounds on single element perturbations, as well as sufficient and necessary conditions for the maximum allowable higher rank perturbations. Perturbed Toeplitz tridiagonal $M$-matrices are considered as a special case. We compare our results to existing normwise bounds due to Bouchon and an iterative algorithm provided by Buffoni. We demonstrate the utility of these results by considering an application: ensuring a nonnegative solution of a discrete analogue of an integro-differential population model.

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)0.012
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicMolecular spectroscopy and chiralityFrench-language works237,207