MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558455635 · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa85a4

The<i>q</i>-Onsager algebra and multivariable<i>q</i>-special functions

2017· article· en· W2558455635 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical functions and polynomials
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasis (linear algebra)Algebra over a fieldMonomial basisOrthogonalityMonomialStandard basisPolynomialOperator (biology)Annihilator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Two sets of mutually commuting q -difference operators x i and y j , i , j = 1 , . . . , N such that x i and y i generate a homomorphic image of the q -Onsager algebra for each i are introduced. The common polynomial eigenfunctions of each set are found to be entangled product of elementary Pochhammer functions in N variables and N + 3 parameters. Under certain conditions on the parameters, they form two ‘dual’ bases of polynomials in N variables. The action of each operator with respect to its dual basis is block tridiagonal. The overlap coefficients between the two dual bases are expressed as entangled products of q -Racah polynomials and satisfy an orthogonality relation. The overlap coefficients between either one of these bases and the multivariable monomial basis are also considered. One obtains in this case entangled products of dual q -Krawtchouk polynomials. Finally, the ‘split’ basis in which the two families of operators act as block bidiagonal matrices is also provided.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and TheoreticalSame topicMathematical functions and polynomialsFrench-language works237,207