MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606972987

Your NSF Mathematical Sciences Institutes

2007· article· en· W2606972987 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIowa State University Digital Repository (Iowa State University) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacsBanff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and DiscoveryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAmerican Institute of MathematicsDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEngineering ethicsComputer scienceManagement scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SAMSI), as well as the Banff International Research Station (BIRS) in Canada that is supported by Canada, the US, and Mexico.Links to the pages of all the institutes can be found at http://mathinstitutes.org/.All these institutes provide a valuable and accessible resource for organizing and attending workshops and other programs in linear algebra.In this article, we emphasize opportunities to organize or participate in week-long research workshops offered by these institutes.Participants are typically provided with support for local expenses and in some cases travel funds are available.Although it is generally expected that one or more of the organizers be US citizens (and in the case of BIRS, one or more be Canadian citizens), participants are usually invited from all over the world.In addition to workshops, many of the institutes have many other programs for researchers, graduate students, undergraduates, industry, and the public; we will only briefly and partially mention such programs in this article.Any of these programs can be highly stimulating to research.While all the institutes offer workshops, there are substantial differences in suitable topics for proposals.Some of the institutes have a particular institutional focus (for example, SAMSI emphasizes statistics) or a different theme each year with most workshops related to the theme.Also, many of the institutes have some form of university membership and some special programs are restricted to faculty and students at member universities.The websites for AIM, IMA, IPAM, MSRI, SAMSI and BIRS all make it easy to find out how to propose activities; AIM, IPAM, MSRI and BIRS have links for proposers on their main page; IMA and SAMSI have such links on the "Programs" page.Many of the institutes have been supportive of linear algebra and offer excellent access to research support.IMA, AIM, and BIRS are of particular interest to ILAS members.IMA hosted a linear algebra year in 1991-1992 organized by R.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.185 · 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