MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Atlas of Epsilon-Delta Continuity Proofs in Function Space <em>F</em>(R, R)

2025· preprint· W4415718381 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Soltanifar

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicHistory and Theory of Mathematics
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofCLARITYIntuitionConfusionAtlas (anatomy)Calculus (dental)Set (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ϵ-δ definition of continuity, foundational to real analysis, continues to attract sustained interest across the mathematics community. This paper responds to this interest by providing a comprehensive, systematic survey of direct ϵ-δ proofs for a broad spectrum of functions. We meticulously analyze 54 prominent real-valued functions, categorizing them into eight distinct clusters to highlight recurring proof structures and methodologies. For each function, we present a step-by-step proof alongside an explicit formula for δ in terms of ϵ and the point of continuity. Beyond serving as a robust pedagogical resource for students, instructors, and independent learners, this collection demystifies the proof-writing process by showcasing the elegant, unifying logic underlying a seemingly diverse set of problems. The work’s organized structure and detailed examples offer clarity where confusion often resides, ultimately fostering a deeper intuition for the core principles of continuity. By transforming a collection of challenging proofs into an accessible and navigable reference, this atlas opens up new avenues for further research in the field for mathematicians.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicHistory and Theory of MathematicsFrench-language works237,207