MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W143227194 · doi:10.70930/tac/077xcw8v

An extended view of the Chu-construction

2006· article· en· W143227194 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jürgen Koslowski

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTechnische Universität Braunschweig
KeywordsGeneralizationBase (topology)MathematicsAlgebra over a fieldSpan (engineering)Natural (archaeology)Computer sciencePure mathematicsCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsArithmeticEngineeringHistoryStructural engineeringMathematical analysisArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A.The cyclic Chu-construction for closed bicategories with pullbacks, which generalizes the original Chu-construction for symmetric monoidal closed categories, turns out to have a non-cyclic counterpart.Both use so-called Chu-spans as new 1-cells between 1-cells of the underlying bicategory, which form the new objects.Chu-spans may be seen as a natural generalization of 2-cell-spans in the base bicategory that no longer are confined to a single hom-category.This view helps to clarify the composition of Chu-spans.We consider various approaches of linking the underlying bicategory with the newly constructed ones, for example, by means of two-dimensional generalizations of bifibrations.In the quest for a better connection, we investigate, whether Chu-spans form a double category.While this turns out not to be the case, we are led to considering a generalization of the construction to paths of 1-cells in the base, leading to two hierarchies of closed bicategories, one for linear paths and one for loops.The possibility of moving beyond paths, respectively, loops of the same length is indicated.Finally, Chu-spans in rel are identified as bipartite state transition systems.Even though their composition may fail here due to the lack of pullbacks in rel , basic game-theoretic constructions can be performed on cyclic Chu-spans.These are available in all symmetric monoidal closed categories with finite products.If pullbacks exist as well, the bicategory of cyclic Chuspans inherits a monoidal structure that on objects coincides with the categorical product.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207