MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592290387 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v9n2p18

Products of Reflections and Triangularization of Bilinear Forms

2017· article· en· W2592290387 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacques Helmstetter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsProduct (mathematics)Sesquilinear formBilinear formAffine transformationPure mathematicsOrthogonal matrixLinear subspaceBilinear interpolationOrthogonal complementInner product spaceTriangular matrixOrthogonal transformationSubspace topologyMathematical analysisOrthogonal basisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present article is motivated by the theorem of Cartan-Dieudonn\'e which states that every orthogonal transformation is a product of reflections. Its purpose is to determine, for each orthogonal transformation, the minimal number of factors in a decomposition into a product of reflections, and to propose an effective algorithm giving such a decomposition. With the orthogonal transformations $g$ of a quadratic space $(V,q)$, it associates couples $(S,\phi)$ where $S$ is a subspace of $V$, and $\phi$ an non-degenerate bilinear form on $S$ such that $\phi(y,y)=q(y)$ for every $y$ in $S$. In general, the minimal decompositions of $g$ into a product of reflections correspond to the bases of $S$ in which the matrix of $\phi$ is lower triangular. Therefore, we need an algorithm of triangularization of bilinear forms. Affine isometries are also taken into consideration.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.444
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.108 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicMathematics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207