MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385482943 · doi:10.3390/sym15081522

Results on Minkowski-Type Inequalities for Weighted Fractional Integral Operators

2023· article· en· W4385482943 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSymmetry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Inequalities and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsMathematicsFractional calculusPure mathematicsType (biology)ConvexityOperator (biology)Applied mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldDigamma functionKernel (algebra)Calculus (dental)Riemann zeta functionArithmetic zeta function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers a general family of weighted fractional integral operators and utilizes this general operator to establish numerous reverse Minkowski inequalities. When it comes to understanding and investigating convexity and inequality, symmetry is crucial. It provides insightful explanations, clearer explanations, and useful methods to help with the learning of key mathematical ideas. The kernel of the general family of weighted fractional integral operators is related to a wide variety of extensions and generalizations of the Mittag-Leffler function and the Hurwitz-Lerch zeta function. It delves into the applications of fractional-order integral and derivative operators in mathematical and engineering sciences. Furthermore, this article derives specific cases for selected functions and presents various applications to illustrate the obtained results. Additionally, novel applications involving the Digamma function are introduced.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.250 · 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