Foundations of physics in Milan, Padua and Paris. Newtonian trajectories from celestial mechanics to atomic physics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is written, in a very informal and colloquial style, on the occasion of the seventieth birthday of Antonio Giorgilli. The aim is to describe how his first scientific works were actually conceived within a group that happened to be formed in the years seventies with an ambitious program on the foundations of physics. Namely, to understand whether the recent (at those times) progress in dynamical systems theory might allow one to enlighten in some new way the relations between quantum mechanics and classical physics. This required to understand what impact dynamical systems theory may have on the foundations of classical statistical mechanics (with particular attention to the Fermi-Pasta-Ulam problem), and on matter-radiation interaction. In such a frame Celestial Mechanics too started to be addressed, particularly by Antonio, initially just as a kind of a byproduct. Here a recollection is given of how the group was formed. Then a quick review is given of the results obtained, the attention being mainly addressed to those relevant for the original foundational program.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it