MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383620755 · doi:10.1002/mma.9530

New Clebsch–Gordan‐type integrals involving threefold products of complete elliptic integrals

2023· article· en· W4383620755 on OpenAlexaff
John M. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Identities
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsElliptic integralElliptic functionType (biology)Jacobi elliptic functionsLegendre polynomialsIntegration by partsMultiple integralElliptic rational functionsSlater integralsVolume integralPure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldOrder of integration (calculus)Quarter periodMathematical analysisElliptic curveIntegral equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple elliptic integrals related to the generalized Clebsch–Gordan (CG) integral are of importance in many areas in physics and special functions theory. Zhou has introduced and applied Legendre function‐based techniques to prove symbolic evaluations for integrals of CG form involving twofold and threefold products of complete elliptic integral expressions, and this includes Zhou's remarkable proof of an open problem due to Wan. The foregoing considerations motivate the results introduced in this article, in which we prove closed‐form evaluations for new CG‐type integrals that involve threefold products of the complete elliptic integrals and . Our methods are based on the use of fractional derivative operators, via a variant of a technique we had previously referred to as semi‐integration by parts.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Methods in the Applied SciencesSame topicAdvanced Mathematical IdentitiesFrench-language works237,207