MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6929698068 · doi:10.5061/dryad.p4sg5

Data from: Huygens' clocks revisited

2017· dataset· en· W6929698068 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2017
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquivariant mapToroidBifurcationTransformation (genetics)Physical systemPendulumChaotic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1665, Huygens observed that two identical pendulum clocks, weakly coupled through a heavy beam, soon synchronized with the same period and amplitude but with the two pendula swinging in opposite directions. This behaviour is now called anti-phase synchronization. This paper presents an analysis of the behaviour of a large class of coupled identical oscillators, including Huygens' clocks, using methods of equivariant bifurcation theory. The equivariant normal form for such systems is developed and the possible solutions are characterized. The transformation of the physical system parameters to the normal form parameters is given explicitly and applied to the physical values appropriate for Huygens' clocks, and to those of more recent studies. It is shown that Huygens' physical system could only exhibit anti-phase motion, explaining why Huygens observed exclusively this. By contrast, some more recent researchers have observed in-phase or other more complicated motion in their own experimental systems. Here, it is explained which physical characteristics of these systems allow for the existence of these other types of stable solutions. The present analysis not only accounts for these previously observed solutions in a unified framework, but also introduces behaviour not classified by other authors, such as a synchronized toroidal breather and a chaotic toroidal breather.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.017

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→