MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165152668 · doi:10.1017/s0305004108001084

Rolling sphere problems on spaces of constant curvature

2008· article· en· W2165152668 on OpenAlexaff
Velimir Jurdjevic, Jason A. Zimmerman

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnit sphereMathematicsIsometry (Riemannian geometry)Homogeneous spaceLie groupConstant curvatureEuclidean spaceManifold (fluid mechanics)SigmaMathematical analysisMathematical physicsCombinatoricsPure mathematicsCurvaturePhysicsGeometryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The rolling sphere problem on Euclidean space consists of determining the path of minimal length traced by the point of contact of the oriented unit sphere $\mathbb{S}^{n}$ as it rolls on $\mathbb{E}^{n}$ without slipping between two points of $\mathbb{E}^{n}\times SO_{n+1}(\mathbb{R})$ . This problem is extended to situations in which an oriented sphere $\mathbb{S}_{\rho}^{n}$ of radius ρ rolls on a stationary sphere $\mathbb{S}_{\sigma}^{n}$ and to the hyperbolic analogue in which the spheres $\mathbb{S}_{\rho}^{n}$ and $\mathbb{S}_{\sigma}^{n}$ are replaced by the hyperboloids $\mathbb{H}_{\rho}^{n}$ and $\mathbb{H}_{\sigma}^{n}$ respectively. The notion of “rolling” is defined in an isometric sense: the length of the path traced by the point of contact is measured by the Riemannian metric of the stationary manifold, and the orientation of the rolling object is measured by a matrix in its isometry group. These rolling problems are formulated as left invariant optimal control problems on Lie groups whose Hamiltonian extremal equations reveal two remarkable facts: on the level of Lie algebras the extremal equations of all these rolling problems are governed by a single set of equations, and the projections onto the stationary manifold of the extremal equations having I 4 =0, where I 4 is an integral of motion, coincide with the elastic curves on this manifold. The paper then outlines some explicit solutions based on the use of symmetries and the corresponding integrals of motion.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations43
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical SocietySame topicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207