MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400596734 · doi:10.55016/ojs/cdm.v13i2.62728

Some remarks on the lonely runner conjecture

2018· article· en· W4400596734 on OpenAlex
Terence Tao

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Discrete Mathematics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConjectureCombinatoricsMathematicsConstant (computer programming)Lonely runner conjectureUpper and lower boundsUnit (ring theory)Binary logarithmCollatz conjectureMathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lonely runner conjecture of Wills and Cusick, in its most popular formulation, asserts that if $n$ runners with distinct constant speeds run around a unit circle $\R/\Z$ starting at a common time and place, then each runner will at some time be separated by a distance of at least 1/(n+1) from the others. In this paper we make some remarks on this conjecture. Firstly, we can improve the trivial lower bound of 1/(2n) slightly for large n, to (1/(2n)) + (c \log n)/(n^2 (\log\log n)^2) for some absolute constant c>0; previous improvements were roughly of the form (1/(2n)) + c/n^2. Secondly, we show that to verify the conjecture, it suffices to do so under the assumption that the speeds are integers of size n^{O(n^2)}. We also obtain some results in the case when all the velocities are integers of size O(n).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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