MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197132692 · doi:10.32628/ijsrst218477

Analysis of Ideas Changing in the History of Mathematical Analysis

2021· article· en· W3197132692 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ming-Xing Hu, Depeng Kong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHistory and Theory of Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsGermanCalculus (dental)Field (mathematics)Mathematical theorySubject (documents)History of mathematicsMathematical economicsEpistemologyMathematicsMathematics educationComputer scienceHistoryPhilosophyPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis is a branch of mathematics that deals with continuous change and with certain general types of processes that have emerged from the study of continuous change, such as limits, differentiation, and integration. In the history of mathematics, analysis is the first subject became epidemic, the development of analysis originated from the British mathematician and physicist, the Sir Isaac Newton, and the German mathematician, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who developed the theory of Calculus, with hundred-years developing, the modern analysis is now very ample and has widely applications, it has grown into an enormous and central field of mathematical research, with applications throughout the sciences and in areas such as finance, economics, and sociology. In this paper, we investigated in some detail with the changing of the ideas in mathematical analysis. By numerating historical facts and the mathematical ideas, we concluded the result that the ideas changing is because of the changing of the studying objects, the conclusion are studied detailly in the paper.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0140.014
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Science and TechnologySame topicHistory and Theory of MathematicsFrench-language works237,207