MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205654034 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v14n1p55

Step Pyramid Distribution for Prime Numbers

2022· article· en· W4205654034 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Shaimaa said soltan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Identities
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPrime numberPrime (order theory)Prime k-tupleSimple (philosophy)Pyramid (geometry)CombinatoricsDistribution (mathematics)Prime factorDiscrete mathematicsArithmeticAlgorithmGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this document, we will present a new way to visualize the distribution of Prime Numbers in the number system to spot Prime numbers in a subset of numbers using a simpler algorithm. Then we will look throw a classification algorithm to check if a number is prime using only 7 simple arithmetic operations with an algorithm complexity less than or equal to O (7) operations for any number.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicAdvanced Mathematical IdentitiesFrench-language works237,207