MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089110236 · doi:10.1142/9789814623995_0143

DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN SHAPE DYNAMICS AND GENERAL RELATIVITY

2015· preprint· en· W2089110236 on OpenAlexaff
Henrique Gomes, Tim Koslowski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOptics and Image Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetismQuantization (signal processing)Theoretical physicsTheory of relativityPoint (geometry)Symmetry (geometry)Dynamics (music)Mechanism (biology)Computer scienceCognitive scienceMathematical economicsMathematicsPhysicsEpistemologyPsychologyGeometryPhilosophyAlgorithmQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this contribution is to elucidate some of the properties of Shape Dynamics (SD) and is largely based on a recent longer article. We shall point out some of the key differences between SD and related theoretical constructions, illustrate the central mechanism of symmetry trading in electromagnetism and finally point out some new quantization strategies inspired by SD. We refrain from describing mathematical detail and from citing literature. For both we refer to the longer article.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptics and Image AnalysisFrench-language works237,207