Extracting Gromov-Witten invariants of a conifold from semi-stable reduction and relative GW-invariants of pairs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of open/closed string duality and large N duality suggests a GromovWitten theory for conifolds that sits on the border of both a closed Gromov-Witten theory and an open Gromov-Witten theory. The work of Jun Li on Gromov-Witten theory for a projective singular variety of the gluing form Y1 ∪D Y2, where D is a smooth divisor on smooth Y1 and Y2, suggests two methods to study Gromov-Witten invariants for a projective conifold: one by a direct generalization of his construction to the conifold singularity and the other by an appropriate semi-stable reduction of a degeneration to a conifold and then apply his results on this new degeneration to extract Gromov-Witten invariants of the original conifold. In this work we carry out the second method. Suggested by the semi-stable reduction, we associate to a conifold
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it