A “Bottom Up” Characterization of Smooth Deligne–Mumford Stacks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In casual discussion, a stack is often described as a variety (the coarse space) together with stabilizer groups attached to some of its subvarieties. However, this description does not uniquely specify the stack. Our main result shows that for a large class of stacks one typically encounters, this description does indeed characterize them. Moreover, we prove that each such stack can be described in terms of two simple procedures applied iteratively to its coarse space: canonical stack constructions and root stack constructions. More precisely, if $\mathcal X$ is a smooth separated tame Deligne-Mumford stack of finite type over a field $k$ with trivial generic stabilizer, it is completely determined by its coarse space $X$ and the ramification divisor (on $X$) of the coarse space morphism $π\colon \mathcal X \to X$. Therefore, to specify such a stack, it is enough to specify a variety and the orders of the stabilizers of codimension 1 points. The group structures, as well as the stabilizer groups of higher codimension points, are then determined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".