MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098043740

2 STICKY CENTRAL LIMIT THEOREMS ON OPEN BOOKS

2013· article· en· W3098043740 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperplaneCentral limit theoremMathematicsCodimensionDisjoint setsDisjoint union (topology)Boundary (topology)Limit (mathematics)Distribution (mathematics)Metric spaceLimitingGaussianSpace (punctuation)Open setCombinatoricsPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsComputer scienceStatisticsQuantum mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a probability distribution on an open book (a metric space obtained by gluing a disjoint union of copies of a half-space along their boundary hyperplanes), we define a precise concept of when the Fréchet mean (barycenter) is sticky. This nonclassical phenomenon is quantified by a law of large numbers (LLN) stating that the empirical mean eventually almost surely lies on the (codimension 1 and hence measure 0) spine that is the glued hyperplane, and a central limit theorem (CLT) stating that the limiting distribution is Gaussian and supported on the spine.We also state versions of the LLN and CLT for the cases where the mean is nonsticky (i.e., not lying on the spine) and partly sticky (i.e., is, on the spine but not sticky). © Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2013.

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)0.020
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations75
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207