MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963589092 · doi:10.1016/j.crma.2017.09.012

Plus and minus logarithms and Amice transform

2017· article· fr· W2963589092 on OpenAlexafffund
Cédric Dion, Antonio Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueComptes Rendus Mathématique · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsDistribution (mathematics)LogarithmCombinatoricsPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give a new description of Pollack's plus and minus p -adic logarithms log p ± in terms of distributions. In particular, if μ ± denote the pre-images of log p ± under the Amice transform, we give explicit formulae for the values μ ± ( a + p n Z p ) for all a ∈ Z p and all integers n ≥ 1 . Our formulae imply that the distribution μ − agrees with a distribution studied by Koblitz in 1977. Furthermore, we show that a similar description exists for Loeffler's two-variable analogues of these plus and minus logarithms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.018

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.291
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComptes Rendus MathématiqueSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207