MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1768587886 · doi:10.1090/tran/6773

Hochster duality in derived categories and point-free reconstruction of schemes

2015· preprint· en· W1768587886 on OpenAlexaff
Joachim Kock, Wolfgang Pitsch

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Mathematical Society · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsDuality (order theory)MathematicsTensor (intrinsic definition)Frame (networking)Pure mathematicsCommutative propertyMathematical proofPoint (geometry)Scheme (mathematics)Algebra over a fieldTopology (electrical circuits)Discrete mathematicsComputer scienceCombinatoricsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a commutative ring R R , we exploit localization techniques and point-free topology to give an explicit realization of both the Zariski frame of R R (the frame of radical ideals in R R ) and its Hochster dual frame as lattices in the poset of localizing subcategories of the unbounded derived category D ( R ) D(R) . This yields new conceptual proofs of the classical theorems of Hopkins-Neeman and Thomason. Next we revisit and simplify Balmer’s theory of spectra and supports for tensor triangulated categories from the viewpoint of frames and Hochster duality. Finally we exploit our results to show how a coherent scheme ( X , O X ) (X,\mathcal {O}_X) can be reconstructed from the tensor triangulated structure of its derived category of perfect complexes.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Mathematical SocietySame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207