MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067308523 · doi:10.1145/2016567.2016570

Rounding coefficients and artificially underflowing terms in non-numeric expressions

2011· article· en· W2067308523 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

VenueACM communications in computer algebra · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoundingIrrational numberMonomialMathematicsPoint (geometry)Invariant (physics)Rational numberDiscrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article takes an analytical viewpoint to address the following questions: 1. How can we justifiably beautify an input or result sum of non-numeric terms that has some approximate coefficients by deleting some terms and/or rounding some coefficients to simpler floating-point or rational numbers? 2. When we add two expressions, how can we justifiably delete more non-zero result terms and/or round some result coefficients to even simpler floating-point, rational or irrational numbers? The methods considered in this paper provide a justifiable scale-invariant way to attack these problems for subexpressions that are multivariate sums of monomials with real exponents.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.004
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.243 · 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