MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079086941 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v2n1p57

Integral Oscillation Criteria for Second-Order Linear Neutral Delay Dynamic Equations on Time Scales

2010· article· en· W2079086941 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNonlinear Differential Equations Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOscillation (cell signaling)MathematicsOrder (exchange)Dynamic equationDelay differential equationFirst orderDifferential equationMathematical analysisCombinatoricsPhysicsApplied mathematicsNonlinear systemQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present several sufficient conditions foroscillation of the second-order linear neutral delay dynamicequation\begin{eqnarray}(y(t)+p(t)y(t-\tau))^{\Delta\Delta}+q(t)y(t-\delta)=0 \nonumber\end{eqnarray}on a time scale $\mathbb{T}$. Here $p(t) , q(t)$ are\textit{rd}-continuous functions defined on on a time scale$\mathbb{T}$. Our results as a special case when $\mathbb{T=R}$ and$\mathbb{T=N}$ improve some well-known oscillation results forsecond-order neutral delay differential and difference equations.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.340 · 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