MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Systems of Linear Equations in Generalized b-Metric Spaces

2024· article· en· W4405193772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Aloqaily

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Analysis and Applications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFixed Point Theorems Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUniquenessMetric spaceMathematicsMetric (unit)Focus (optics)RealmFixed pointAlgebra over a fieldApplied mathematicsComputer sciencePure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a pioneering concept in the realm of metric spaces, specifically focusing on a novel category termed controlled generalized b-metric spaces (CGbMS). The study delves into the investigation of fixed points within CGbMS for self-mappings that exhibit both linear and non-linear contraction characteristics. The analysis establishes the existence and uniqueness of such fixed points, contributing valuable insights into the properties of these spaces. Moreover, the paper extends its impact by exploring diverse applications and implementations derived from the established results. One notable application is the application of these findings in solving systems of linear equations. The comprehensive examination of these applications not only underscores the practical significance of the proposed concept but also offers a broader understanding of its potential utility in various mathematical contexts. In summary, this research not only introduces and rigorously defines the concept of controlled generalized b-metric spaces but also provides a robust theoretical foundation by establishing the existence and uniqueness of fixed points. The exploration of applications, with a focus on solving linear equations, further highlights the practical implications and versatility of the proposed framework within the broader mathematical landscape.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 venueInternational Journal of Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicFixed Point Theorems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207