MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1819257459 · doi:10.1090/pspum/073/2131016

Tree-level invariants of three-manifolds, Massey products and the Johnson homomorphism

2005· other· en· W1819257459 on OpenAlexaff
Stavros Garoufalidis, Jerome Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of symposia in pure mathematics · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCollege of ComputingNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHomomorphismMathematicsAlgebra homomorphismHomology (biology)Pure mathematicsHomogeneous spaceAlgebra over a fieldCombinatoricsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

. We show that the tree-level part of a recent theory of invariants of 3-manifolds (due, independently, to Goussarov and Habiro [Gu, Hb]) is essentially given by classical algebraic topology in terms of the Johnson homomorphism and Massey products, for arbitrary 3-manifolds. A key role of our proof is played by the notion of a homology cylinder, viewed as an enlargement of the mapping class group, and an apparently new Lie algebra of graphs colored by H1 (\\Sigma) of a closed surface \\Sigma, closely related to deformation quantization on a surface [AMR1, AMR2, Ko3] as well as to a Lie algebra that encodes the symmetries of Massey products and the Johnson homomorphism. In addition, we present a realization theorem for Massey products and the Johnson homomorphism on homology cylinders. 1. Introduction 1.1. A brief summary. The purpose of the paper is to provide answers to the following two sets of problems: ffl Show that the Johnson homomorphism is contained in the tree-level part of a ...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations60
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of symposia in pure mathematicsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207