MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399654592 · doi:10.54097/w1wb5j26

A Contour Integral and Complex Power Series Proof of Stirling Formula

2024· article· en· W4399654592 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiqi Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Science Engineering and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStatistical Mechanics and Entropy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStirling engineStirling numbers of the first kindMathematicsSimple (philosophy)Series (stratigraphy)Calculus (dental)Stirling numberStirling numbers of the second kindPower seriesResidue theoremMathematical analysisPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a matter of fact, the Stirling formula is a very important formula for estimating the size of factorials, which effectively simplifies the calculation of factorials. Based on the convergency theorem, it is very accurate when n is very small, for example, when n=6, the error is only 1.4%. This formula was first discovered by Abraham de Moivre and Stirling, and mathematicians such as provided much proof of it. In addition, there is a famous proof that only relies on ordinary calculus. With this in mind, this paper attempts to independently solve this problem using simple complex analysis methods. To be specific, contour integral, Residue Theorem, complex series will be demonstrated directly and immediately. At the same time, the proof processing will be presented in detail based on the derivations of the formulae. In the meantime, the current limitations will be clarified and the prospects will be proposed according to the analysis. Overall, these results shed light on guiding further exploration of Stirling Formula proofing and applications.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueHighlights in Science Engineering and TechnologySame topicStatistical Mechanics and EntropyFrench-language works237,207