MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582597102 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v9n1p84

A Viscosity Approximation Method for the Split Feasibility Problems in Hilbert Space

2017· article· en· W2582597102 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsHilbert spaceLambdaViscositySequence (biology)Space (punctuation)Alpha (finance)CombinatoricsMathematical analysisPhysicsStatisticsThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the most basic idea is to apply the viscosity approximation method to study the split feasibility problem (SFP), we will be in the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space to study the problem . We defined $x_{0}\in C$ as arbitrary and $x_{n+1}=(1-\alpha_{n})P_{C}(I-\lambda_{n}A^{*}(I-P_{Q})A)x_{n}+\alpha_{n}f(x_{n})$, for $n\geq0,$ where $\{\alpha_{n}\}\subset(0,1)$. Under the proper control conditions of some parameters, we show that the sequence $\{x_{n}\}$ converges strongly to a solution of SFP. The results in this paper extend and further improve the relevant conclusions in Deepho (Deepho, J. \& Kumam, P., 2015).

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicOptimization and Variational AnalysisFrench-language works237,207