MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052209103 · doi:10.4279/pip.020003

Expansions for eigenfunction and eigenvalues of large-$n$ Toeplitz matrices

2010· article· en· W2052209103 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leo P. Kadanoff

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers in Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchMaterials Research Science and Engineering Center, Harvard UniversityInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueUniversity of ChicagoIndustry CanadaGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsToeplitz matrixEigenvalues and eigenvectorsEigenfunctionMathematicsInverseMatrix (chemical analysis)Asymptotic expansionPure mathematicsMathematical analysisMathematical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper constructs methods for finding convergent expansions for eigenvectors and eigenvalues of large-$n$ Toeplitz matrices based on a situation in which the analogous infinite-$n$ matrix would be singular. It builds upon work done by Dai, Geary, and Kadanoff [H Dai et al., J. Stat. Mech. P05012 (2009)] on exact eigenfunctions for Toeplitz operators which are infinite-dimension Toeplitz matrices. One expansion for the finite-$n$ case is derived from the operator eigenvalue equations obtained by continuing the finite-$n$ Toeplitz matrix to plus infinity. A second expansion is obtained by continuing the finite-$n$ matrix to minus infinity. The two expansions work together to give an apparently convergent expansion for the finite-$n$ eigenvalues and eigenvectors, based upon a solvability condition for determining eigenvalues. The expansions involve an expansion parameter expressed as an inverse power of $n$. A variational principle is developed, which gives an approximate expression for determining eigenvalues. The lowest order asymptotics for eigenvalues and eigenvectors agree with the earlier work [H Dai et al., J. Stat. Mech. P05012 (2009)]. The eigenvalues have a $(\ln n)/n$ term as their leading finite-$n$ correction in the central region of the spectrum. The $1/n$ correction in this region is obtained here for the first time.Received: 19 October 2009; Accepted: 29 September 2010; Edited by: A. G. Green; Reviewed by: T. Ehrhardt, Math. Dept., Univ. California, Santa Cruz, USA; DOI: 10.4279/PIP.020003

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers in PhysicsSame topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207