MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315927277 · doi:10.1080/00029890.2022.2156241

A Beautiful Inequality by Saint-Venant and Pólya Revisited

2023· article· en· W4315927277 on OpenAlex
Arno Berger

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Mathematical Monthly · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsoperimetric inequalityInequalityMathematicsSimple (philosophy)Isoperimetric dimensionPlanarSAINTSet (abstract data type)Mathematical economicsPure mathematicsCalculus (dental)CombinatoricsMathematical analysisComputer scienceArt historyEpistemologyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In mathematical physics and beyond, one encounters many beautiful inequalities that relate geometric or physical quantities describing the shape or size of a set. Such isoperimetric inequalities often have a long history and many important applications. For instance, the eponymous and most classical of all isoperimetric inequalities was known already in antiquity. It asserts that among all closed planar curves of a given length, the circles with perimeter equal to that length, and only they, enclose the largest area. Though not nearly as well-known, an isoperimetric inequality conjectured by Saint-Venant in the 1850s and first proved by Pólya almost a century later, is also very beautiful and important. By presenting a short proof as well as two simple physical interpretations, this article illustrates why the result deserves to be cherished by every student of applied analysis.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.295 · 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