MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140517298 · doi:10.1017/s1446788712000237

ON THE EQUATION <i>f</i>(<i>g</i>(<i>x</i>))=<i>f</i>(<i>x</i>)<i>h</i><sup><i>m</i></sup>(<i>x</i>) FOR COMPOSITE POLYNOMIALS

2012· article· en· W2140517298 on OpenAlexafffund
Himadri Ganguli, Jonas Jankauskas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Australian Mathematical Society · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAnalytic Number Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsMathematicsInteger (computer science)PolynomialCombinatoricsDiophantine equationConjectureField (mathematics)Separable spaceChebyshev polynomialsFunction fieldContext (archaeology)Mathematical analysisPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we solve the equation f(g(x))=f(x)hm(x) where f(x), g(x) and h(x) are unknown polynomials with coefficients in an arbitrary field K, f(x) is nonconstant and separable, deg g≥2, the polynomial g(x) has nonzero derivative g′(x)≠0 in K[x] and the integer m≥2 is not divisible by the characteristic of the field K. We prove that this equation has no solutions if deg f≥3 . If deg f=2 , we prove that m=2 and give all solutions explicitly in terms of Chebyshev polynomials. The Diophantine applications for such polynomials f(x) , g(x) , h(x) with coefficients in ℚ or ℤ are considered in the context of the conjecture of Cassaigne et al. on the values of Liouville’s λ function at points f(r) , r∈ℚ.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Australian Mathematical SocietySame topicAnalytic Number Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207