MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765474069 · doi:10.11650/tjm/171003

Extensions to Chen's Minimizing Equal Mass Parallelogram Solutions

2017· article· en· W2765474069 on OpenAlexaff
Abdalla Mansur, Daniel C. Offin, Alessandro Arsie

Bibliographic record

VenueTaiwanese Journal of Mathematics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallelogramMathematicsChenExtension (predicate logic)Applied mathematicsMathematical analysisCalculus (dental)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the extension of the minimizing equal mass parallelogram solutions which was derived by Chen in 2001 [2]. Chen's solution was minimizing for one quarter of the period $[0,T]$, where numerical integration had been used in his proof. In this paper we extend Chen's solution in the reduced space to $[0,4T]$ and we show that this extension is also minimizing over the intervals $[0,2T]$ and $[0,4T]$. The minimizing property of the extension is proved without using numerical integration.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 venueTaiwanese Journal of MathematicsSame topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207