MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Absolutely Abnormal Numbers

2001· article· en· W2034341049 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

VenueAmerican Mathematical Monthly · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicBenford’s Law and Fraud Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A normal number is one whose decimal expansion (or expansion to some base other than 10) contains all possible finite configurations of digits roughly with their expected frequencies. More formally, let N(α; b, a, x) = #{1 ≤ n ≤ x: the nth digit in the base-b expansion of α is a} (1) denote the counting function of the occurrences of the digit a (0 ≤ a < b) in the b-ary expansion of the real number α, and define the corresponding limiting frequency δ(α; b, a) = lim x→∞ 1N(α; b, a, x). (2) x The number α is simply normal to the base b if the limit defining δ(α; b, a) exists and equals 1/b for each 0 ≤ a < b. A number is normal to the base b if it is simply normal to each of the bases b, b 2, b 3,.... For instance, it was shown by Champernowne [1] that the number 0.12345678910111213..., formed by concatenating all of the positive integers together into a single decimal, is normal to base 10 (the analogous construction works for any base b ≥ 2),

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · 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