MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300304910

On the interval of fluctuation of the singular values of random matrices

2015· article· W4300304910 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander E. Litvak, Alain Pajor, Nicole Tomczak-Jaegermann

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typearticle
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsRestricted isometry propertyRandom matrixInterval (graph theory)Matrix (chemical analysis)CovarianceMultivariate random variableType (biology)Covariance matrixRate of convergenceEuclidean geometryRandom variableEigenvalues and eigenvectorsGeometryStatisticsPhysicsQuantum mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let $A$ be a matrix whose columns $X_1,\dots, X_N$ are independent random vectors in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Assume that the tails of the 1-dimensional marginals decay as $\mathbb{P}(|\langle X_i, a\rangle|\geq t)\leq t^{-p}$ uniformly in $a\in S^{n-1}$ and $i\leq N$. Then for $p>4$ we prove that with high probability $A/{\sqrt{n}}$ has the Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) provided that Euclidean norms $|X_i|$ are concentrated around $\sqrt{n}$. We also show that the covariance matrix is well approximated by the empirical covariance matrix and establish corresponding quantitative estimates on the rate of convergence in terms of the ratio $n/N$. Moreover, we obtain sharp bounds for both problems when the decay is of the type $ \exp({-t^{\alpha}})$ with $\alpha \in (0,2]$, extending the known case $\alpha\in[1, 2]$.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.121 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207