Problem optimalnih kartografskih projekcija : Problem of the optimal cartographic projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kartografske projekcije primjenjuju se za grafičko prikazivanje teritorija u sitnom mjerilu. Pravilnim izborom projekcije smanjuju se deformacije prikazanog teritorija, koji je omeđen graničnom linijom. U većini slučajeva ta granična linija nije neka matematički definirana krivulja, koja se najlakše prikazuje u obliku zatvorenog poligona. Optimalne kartografske projekcije, slijedeći neki definirani kriterij, trebale bi utvrditi konstante projekcije s najmanjim mogućim deformacijama. Airy-Kavrajski kriterij vodi direktno do optimizacije Euklidske norme, a to znači do metode najmanjih kvadrata. Brzi moderni kompjutori omogućuju jednostavnu optimizaciju bilo koje analitički definirane projekcije za teritorije čija granica se aproksimira konačnim nizom individualnih točaka. : Cartographic projections are basis for the graphical representation of various territories in small scale mapping. Proper selection of projection reduces the deformation of the presented territory, which is bounded by a boundary line. In most cases, this border line is not a mathematically defined curve, which is most easily displayed in the form of a closed polygon. The optimal cartographic projections based on a selected criterion of quality are those whose constants lead to the smallest value of the criterion. In the presented work it is recommended to use Airy-Kavrajski criterion whose minimization is actually minimization of the second Euclidean norm. The solution of optimal projections of various classes is reduced to the method of least squares. Fast modern computers enable the optimization of an arbitrary territory by evaluating the selected criterion in a finite number of points.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".