MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1863376393 · doi:10.1007/s40993-015-0005-7

One-level density of families of elliptic curves and the Ratios Conjecture

2015· article· en· W1863376393 on OpenAlexafffund
Chantal David, Duc Khiem Huynh, James Parks

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Number Theory · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of LethbridgeConcordia University
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsConjectureMathematicsElliptic curvePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the Ratios Conjecture as introduced by Conrey, Farmer and Zirnbauer, we obtain closed formulas for the one-level density for two families of L-functions attached to elliptic curves, and we can then determine the underlying symmetry types of the families. The one-level scaling density for the first family corresponds to the orthogonal distribution as predicted by the conjectures of Katz and Sarnak, and the one-level scaling density for the second family is the sum of the Dirac distribution and the even orthogonal distribution. This is a new phenomenon for a family of curves with odd rank: the trivial zero at the central point accounts for the Dirac distribution, and also affects the remaining part of the scaling density which is then (maybe surprisingly) the even orthogonal distribution. The one-level density for this family was studied in the past for test functions with Fourier transforms of limited support, but since the Fourier transforms of the even orthogonal and odd orthogonal distributions are undistinguishable for small support, it was not possible to identify the distribution with those techniques. This can be done with the Ratios Conjecture, and it sheds more light on “independent” and “non-independent” zeroes, and the repulsion phenomenon.

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)0.013
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Number TheorySame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207