MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015976743 · doi:10.4153/cjm-2012-032-1

On the Bragg Diffraction Spectra of a Meyer Set

2012· article· en· W2015976743 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Mathematics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicQuasicrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAperiodic graphMathematicsSet (abstract data type)Intensity (physics)DiffractionPoint (geometry)Fourier transformBragg peakBragg's lawMathematical analysisOpticsCombinatoricsGeometryPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Meyer sets have a relatively dense set of Bragg peaks, and for this reason they may be considered as basic mathematical examples of (aperiodic) crystals. In this paper we investigate the pure point part of the diffraction of Meyer sets in more detail. The results are of two kinds. First, we show that, given aMeyer set and any positive intensity a less than the maximum intensity of its Bragg peaks, the set of Bragg peaks whose intensity exceeds a is itself a Meyer set (in the Fourier space). Second, we show that if a Meyer set is modified by addition and removal of points in such a way that its density is not altered too much (the allowable amount being given explicitly as a proportion of the original density), then the newly obtained set still has a relatively dense set of Bragg peaks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.200 · 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