MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153975732 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v13n3p13

On Notations for Conic Hulls and Related Considerations on Tangent Cones

2021· article· en· W3153975732 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giorgio Giorgi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsConic sectionTangent coneNotationConic optimizationCone (formal languages)TangentDual cone and polar coneConvex hullConvex coneRegular polygonConstraint (computer-aided design)Set (abstract data type)Convex setCombinatoricsGeometryConvex optimizationAlgorithmComputer scienceArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose two di erent notations for cones generated by a set and for convex cones generated by a set, usually denoted by a same notation. We make some remarks on the Bouligand tangent cone and on the Clarke tangent cone for star-shaped sets and for locally convex sets. We give some applications of these remarks to a di erentiable optimization problem with an abstract constraint.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicOptimization and Variational AnalysisFrench-language works237,207