MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390483549 · doi:10.1515/gmj-2023-2114

Some summation theorems and transformations for hypergeometric functions of Kampé de Fériet and Srivastava

2024· article· en· W4390483549 on OpenAlexaff
H. M. Srivastava, Bhawna Gupta, Mohammad Idris Qureshi, Mohd Shaid Baboo

Bibliographic record

VenueGeorgian Mathematical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical functions and polynomials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsBasic hypergeometric seriesBilateral hypergeometric seriesHypergeometric identityGeneralized hypergeometric functionHypergeometric function of a matrix argumentHypergeometric distributionHypergeometric functionPure mathematicsConfluent hypergeometric functionLogarithmRiemann zeta functionTransformation (genetics)Algebra over a fieldMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Owing to the remarkable success of the hypergeometric functions of one variable, the authors present a study of some families of hypergeometric functions of two or more variables. These functions include (for example) the Kampé de Fériet-type hypergeometric functions in two variables and Srivastava’s general hypergeometric function in three variables. The main aim of this paper is to provide several (presumably new) transformation and summation formulas for appropriately specified members of each of these families of hypergeometric functions in two and three variables. The methodology and techniques, which are used in this paper, are based upon the evaluation of some definite integrals involving logarithmic functions in terms of Riemann’s zeta function, Catalan’s constant, polylogarithm functions, and so on.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeorgian Mathematical JournalSame topicMathematical functions and polynomialsFrench-language works237,207