MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963751758

Rigidity of frameworks on expanding spheres

2018· article· en· W2963751758 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernd Schulze, Anthony Nixon, Shin‐ichi Tanigawa, Walter Whiteley

Bibliographic record

VenueLancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRigidity (electromagnetism)SPHERESMathematicsStructural rigidityCombinatoricsEuclidean spaceEuclidean geometryPure mathematicsMathematical analysisGeometryPhysicsQuantum mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A rigidity theory is developed for bar-joint frameworks in $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ whose vertices are constrained to lie on concentric $d$-spheres with independently variable radii. In particular, combinatorial characterizations are established for the rigidity of generic frameworks for d=1 with an arbitrary number of independently variable radii, and for $d=2$ with at most two variable radii. This includes a characterization of the rigidity or flexibility of uniformly expanding spherical frameworks in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$. Due to the equivalence of the generic rigidity between Euclidean space and spherical space, these results interpolate between rigidity in one and two dimensions and to some extent between rigidity in two and three dimensions. Symmetry-adapted counts for the detection of symmetry-induced continuous flexibility in frameworks on spheres with variable radii are also provided.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLancaster EPrints (Lancaster University)Same topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207