MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[ARTICLE] Extended Pythagoras Theorem Using Hexagons [Canadian Journal of Mathematics Research / 2021]

2022· article· en· W6958103023 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPythagorean theoremMathematical proofAlgebra over a fieldPythagorean tripleAlgebraic numberAdversarial system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a new variant of the Pythagorean theorem using hexagons instead of squares. It was first published in 2021 on the Canadian Journal of Mathematics Research under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0) - see reference at bottom for original source - and, it is made available again here to the benefit of all that might be interested in such a topic.<br>A video is also available (at Figshare) showing the dynamics of the extended Pythagoras theorem using hexagons for varying sides of the 60-degree-angled triangle (the link is also provided below to the benefit of those who may be interested in exploring more). <br><br>****************************************************************************************************ABSTRACTThis article provides the geometric and algebraic proof of the variant equation of the Pythagorean theorem x<sup>2</sup>-xy+y<sup>2</sup>=z<sup>2</sup>. The hypothesis that will be proven is that just as squares govern the original version x<sup>2</sup>+y<sup>2</sup>=z<sup>2</sup>, hexagons are found to govern x<sup>2</sup>-xy+y<sup>2</sup>=z<sup>2</sup>. Both the special case x equal to y, and the general case of x different from y, are examined.<br><br><br>-------------------------------------------------------------------------For more public data, please visit my Figshare profile: https://figshare.com/authors/Luis_Teia/10811244

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2550.000

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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.108 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicMathematics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207