MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411895391 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v17n2p69

Relationalism: Geometric Model of Ceti f Orbital Duration

2025· article· en· W4411895391 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsDuration (music)LiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work advances a novel relationalistic proposal, a real-world signal constrained Euclidean modeling system that departs from conventional spacetime ontology, physics, or prior relationalistic proposals. Primative geometric elements of time—durations and temporal points—and of space—extensions and spatial points—are defined as relational magnitudes (one-dimensional) and locations (zero-dimensional) respectively. In rishta relationalism, primitive elements form from discrete relations—separate from measurement methods used to predict or quantify them. Using static symmetry, a dynamic system model uses static states of here and now for object and relational geometric element(s), without relying on spacetime, coordinates, or inertial frames. This article focuses on modeling a canonical object-oriented duration (orbital period of Ceti f) using a known measurant duration (Earth’s orbital period) by scaling selected length elements and pairing with temporal elements quantified by modern physics to generate novel spatiotemporal elements. The resulting model is measurable with standard units. Unique spatiotemporal elements, partitioned into units, introduces a novel application for Euclidean translation in relationalism. Rishta relationalism captures primitive metrics in the shared “now,” using a synchronized, omniscient view of an omnipresent universe.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207