MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895878481 · doi:10.1007/s12346-019-00330-y

Spiderweb Central Configurations

2019· article· en· W2895878481 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Theory of Dynamical Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUniquenessMathematical proofConstructiveIntersection (aeronautics)Focus (optics)Constraint (computer-aided design)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we study spiderweb central configurations for the N-body problem, i.e configurations given by $$N=n \times \ell +1$$ masses located at the intersection points of $$\ell $$ concurrent equidistributed half-lines with n circles and a central mass $$m_0$$ , under the hypothesis that the $$\ell $$ masses on the i-th circle are equal to a positive constant $$m_i$$ ; we allow the particular case $$m_0=0$$ . We focus on constructive proofs of the existence of spiderweb central configurations, which allow numerical implementations. Additionally, we prove by a rigorous numerical method the uniqueness of such central configurations when $$\ell \in \{2,\ldots ,9\}$$ and arbitrary n and $$m_i$$ ; under the constraint $$m_1\ge m_2\ge \cdots \ge m_n$$ we also prove uniqueness for $$\ell \in \{10,\ldots ,18\}$$ and n not too large. We also give an algorithm providing a rigorous proof of the existence and local unicity of such central configurations when given as input a choice of n, $$\ell $$ and $$m_0, \ldots ,m_n$$ . Finally, our numerical simulations highlight some interesting properties of the mass distribution.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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