MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953138458 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0909.0131

Bounded symbols and reproducing kernel thesis for truncated Toeplitz operators

2009· preprint· en· W2953138458 on OpenAlexaff
Anton Baranov, Isabelle Chalendar, Emmanuel Fricain, Javad Mashreghi, Dan Timotin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHolomorphic and Operator Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToeplitz matrixBounded functionKernel (algebra)MathematicsComputer scienceAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compressions of Toeplitz operators to coinvariant subspaces of $H^2$ are called truncated Toeplitz operators. We study two questions related to these operators. The first, raised by Sarason, is whether boundedness of the operator implies the existence of a bounded symbol; the second is the reproducing kernel thesis. We show that in general the answer to the first question is negative, and we exhibit some classes of spaces for which the answers to both questions are positive.

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)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHolomorphic and Operator TheoryFrench-language works237,207