MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255411022 · doi:10.1002/qua.1075

Structural analysis of certain linear operators representing chemical network systems via the existence and uniqueness theorems of spectral resolution. VI*

2001· article· en· W4255411022 on OpenAlexafffund
Shigeru Arimoto, Mark Spivakovsky, Hiromu Ohno, Peter Zizler, Keith F. Taylor, Tokio Yamabe, Paul G. Mezey

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Quantum Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGraph theory and applications
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaMount Royal UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsUniquenessResolution (logic)Space (punctuation)Additive functionSeries (stratigraphy)Power seriesPure mathematicsTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceCombinatoricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present Part VI of this series of articles provides a mathematical and methodical link between (i) fundamental methodology in the repeat space theory (RST), which is referred to as the approach via the aspect of form and general topology and which has universal unifying power to handle additivity problems of molecules that have many identical moieties, and (ii) frontier electron theory of reactivity indices. Using theoretical tools required to link (i) and (ii), we establish a theorem from which the Generalized Alpha Existence Theorem (a theorem essential in the RST and proved in the previous Part V) directly follows. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Int J Quantum Chem 84: 389–400, 2001

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Quantum ChemistrySame topicGraph theory and applicationsFrench-language works237,207