MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167467372 · doi:10.1002/mana.201800567

Inversion formula and range conditions for a linear system related with the multi‐interval finite Hilbert transform in <i>L</i><sup>2</sup>

2021· article· en· W3167467372 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Katsevich, Marco Bertola, Alexander Tovbis

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematische Nachrichten · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical functions and polynomials
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsHilbert matrixUniquenessInversion (geology)Hilbert transformInjective functionMatrix (chemical analysis)Matrix functionPure mathematicsDisjoint setsMathematical analysisSymmetric matrixHilbert spaceEigenvalues and eigenvectorsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Given n disjoint intervals on together with n functions , , and an matrix , the problem is to find an L 2 solution , , to the linear system , where , is a matrix of finite Hilbert transforms with defined on , and is a matrix of the corresponding characteristic functions on . Since we can interpret , as a generalized multi‐interval finite Hilbert transform, we call the formula for the solution as “the inversion formula” and the necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of a solution as the “range conditions”. In this paper we derive the explicit inversion formula and the range conditions in two specific cases: a) the matrix Θ is symmetric and positive definite, and; b) all the entries of Θ are equal to one. We also prove the uniqueness of solution, that is, that our transform is injective. In the case a), that is, when the matrix Θ is positive definite, the inversion formula is given in terms of the solution of the associated matrix Riemann–Hilbert Problem. In the case b) we reduce the multi interval problem to a problem on n copies of and then express our answers in terms of the Fourier transform. We also discuss other cases of the matrix Θ.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematische NachrichtenSame topicMathematical functions and polynomialsFrench-language works237,207