MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1883357330 · doi:10.1090/amsip/033/01

A survey of mirror principle

2003· book-chapter· en· W1883357330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric D’Hoker, D. H. Phong, Shing‐Tung Yau

Bibliographic record

VenueAMS/IP studies in advanced mathematics · 2003
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyComputer sciencePhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note briefly reviews the Mirror Principle as developed in the series of papers (19)(20)(21)(22)(23). We illustrate this theory with a few new examples. One of them gives an intriguing connection to a problem of counting holomorphic disks and annuli. This note has been submitted for the proceedings of the Workshop on Strings, Duality and Geometry the C.R.M. in Montreal of March 2000.

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)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAMS/IP studies in advanced mathematicsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207