MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401631922 · doi:10.22215/etd/2024-16095

On Differential Equations With Indefinite Principal Parts

2024· dissertation· en· W4401631922 on OpenAlexaff
Leila Gholizadeh Zivlaei

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFractional Differential Equations Solutions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsOrdinary differential equationDifferential equationDifferential operatorMathematical analysisBoundary value problemPure mathematicsApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This doctoral dissertation consists of three refereed open access papers.These papers comprise chapters 2-4 herein.They deal with problems arising from a study of various differential equations with indefinite principal parts whether they be classified as ordinary, abstract, or fractional.In the first paper (Chapter 2) we show that Sturm's separation theorem always fails for a classical real two term second order differential equation in the event that the principal part has one turning point inside the interval of definition.In the second paper (Chapter 3) we consider differential equations defined by so-called conformable derivatives and show that these differential operators are essentially multiplication operators (by a possibly sign-indefinite leading term) on a space of ordinary derivatives of functions.In the third paper (Chapter 4) we prove existence and uniqueness theorems for initial value problems and two-point boundary problems associated with fractional differential equations defined by composition of right Caputo differential operators and left Riemann-Liouville differential operators with indefinite principal parts. PrefaceThis integrated thesis consists of four chapters: Chapter 1 consists of an introduction to the questions and the problems considered in the thesis.Chapters 2-4 consist of complete reprints of published papers.Note that all articles are reproduced in whole as they appeared in open access journals.The thesis supervisor (ABM) attests that the student was fully involved in setting up and conducting the research, obtaining the data and analyzing all the results, as well as preparing and writing the material presented in the three attached jointly co-authored article(s) integrated within this thesis.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicFractional Differential Equations SolutionsFrench-language works237,207