MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507301859 · doi:10.70930/tac/6p98o499

Compositories and Gleaves

2016· article· en· W1507301859 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Cecilia Flori, T. A. Fritz

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaGovernment of CanadaJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsMorphismMathematicsDistributive propertySheafPure mathematicsCartesian closed categoryCartesian productAlgebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sheaves are objects of a local nature: a global section is determined by how it looks locally.Hence, a sheaf cannot describe mathematical structures which contain global or nonlocal geometric information.To fill this gap, we introduce the theory of "gleaves", which are presheaves equipped with an additional "gluing operation" of compatible pairs of local sections.This generalizes the conditional product structures of Dawid and Studený, which correspond to gleaves on distributive lattices.Our examples include the gleaf of metric spaces and the gleaf of joint probability distributions.A result of Johnstone shows that a category of gleaves can have a subobject classifier despite not being cartesian closed.Gleaves over the simplex category ∆, which we call compositories, can be interpreted as a new kind of higher category in which the composition of an m-morphism and an n-morphism along a common k-morphism face results in an (m + n -k)-morphism.The distinctive feature of this composition operation is that the original morphisms can be recovered from the composite morphism as initial and final faces.Examples of compositories include nerves of categories and compositories of higher spans.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207