MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078602252 · doi:10.1063/1.3230482

The Lambert W function and quantum statistics

2009· article· en· W2078602252 on OpenAlexaff
S. R. Valluri, M. Gil, David J. Jeffrey, Shantanu Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsIconCitationComputer scienceInformation retrievalFunction (biology)DownloadWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present some applications of the Lambert W function (W function) to the formalism of quantum statistics (QS). We consider the problem of finding extrema in terms of energy for a general QS distribution, which involves the solution of a transcendental equation in terms of the W function. We then present some applications of this formula including Bose–Einstein systems in d dimensions, Maxwell–Boltzmann systems, and black body radiation. We also show that for the appropriate parameter values, this formula reduces to an analytic expression in connection with Wien’s displacement law that was found in a previous study. In addition, we show that for Maxwell–Boltzmann and Bose–Einstein systems, the W function allows us to express the temperature of the system as a function of the thermodynamically relevant chemical potential, the particle density, and other parameters. Finally, we explore an indirect relationship of the W function to the polylogarithm function and to the Lambert transform.

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)0.004
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations65
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicSports Dynamics and BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207