MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Connection Coefficients for Higher-order Bernoulli and Euler Polynomials: A Random Walk Approach

2019· article· en· W2891872939 on OpenAlexaff
Lin Jiu, Christophe Vignat

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œFibonacci quarterly · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnection (principal bundle)Bernoulli's principleEuler's formulaRandom walkOrder (exchange)MathematicsBernoulli polynomialsDifference polynomialsMathematical analysisOrthogonal polynomialsPhysicsGeometryStatisticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use random walks as an approach to obtain connection coefficients for higherorder Bernoulli and Euler polynomials. In particular, we study the cases of a 1-dimensional linear reflected Brownian motion and of a 3-dimensional Bessel process. By considering the successive hitting times of two, three, and four fixed levels of these random walks, we obtain non-trivial identities that involve higher-order Bernoulli and Euler polynomials.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œFibonacci quarterlySame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207