Carathéodory, Helly, and Radon Numbers for Sublattice and Related Convexities
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 Carathéodory, Helly, and Radon numbers are three main invariants in convexity theory. These invariants have been determined, exactly or approximately, for a number of different convexity structures. We consider convexity structures defined by the sublattices and by the convex sublattices of finite-dimensional Euclidian, integer, and Boolean spaces. Such sublattices arise in submodular optimization (lattice programming) and in monotone comparative statics of optimization and fixed point problems. We also consider integral L-natural convexities, induced by dual network flow constraint systems. We determine the exact Carathéodory, Helly, and Radon numbers of most of these convexities, and very close upper and lower bounds for the other Carathéodory numbers. Our results imply, for example, that if a set can be obtained with unions and intersections from a given family of subsets of a finite set then it can be obtained with unions and intersections from a small subfamily. We also show that finding the Carathéodory number of integral L-natural convexities reduces to an extremal problem in the theory of permutations, solved in a companion paper. We leave as open problems the determination of the Helly and Radon numbers of the integer convex sublattice convexity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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