MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205740846 · doi:10.4310/ajm.2021.v25.n2.a3

The $L^q$-spectrum for a class of self-similar measures with overlap

2021· article· en· W3205740846 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn E. Hare, Kevin G. Hare, Wanchun Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Mathematics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsMultifractal systemMeasure (data warehouse)Bounded functionSpectrum (functional analysis)CombinatoricsDimension (graph theory)Bernoulli's principleExponentDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysisFractal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is known that the heuristic principle, referred to as the multifractal formalism, need not hold for self-similar measures with overlap, such as the $3$-fold convolution of the Cantor measure and certain Bernoulli convolutions. In this paper we study an important function in the multifractal theory, the $L^{q}$-spectrum, $\tau (q)$, for measures of finite type, a class of self-similar measures that includes these examples. Corresponding to each measure, we introduce finitely many variants on the $% L^{q}$-spectrum which arise naturally from the finite type structure and are often easier to understand than $\tau $. We show that $\tau$ is always bounded by the minimum of these variants and is equal to the minimum variant for $q\geq 0$. This particular variant coincides with the $L^{q}$-spectrum of the measure $\mu$ restricted to appropriate subsets of its support. If the IFS satisfies particular structural properties, which do hold for the above examples, then $\tau$ is shown to be the minimum of these variants for all $q$. Under certain assumptions on the local dimensions of $\mu$, we prove that the minimum variant for $q \ll 0$ coincides with the straight line having slope equal to the maximum local dimension of $\mu $. Again, this is the case with the examples above. More generally, bounds are given for $\tau$ and its variants in terms of notions closely related to the local dimensions of $\mu $.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of MathematicsSame topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207