MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968778786 · doi:10.1155/imrn/2006/53864

Evil primes and superspecial moduli

2006· article· en· W1968778786 on OpenAlexaff
Eyal Z. Goren, Kristin Lauter

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mathematics Research Notices · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Identities
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsModuliPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a quartic non-biquadratic CM field K, we say that a rational prime p is evil forK if at least one of the principally polarized abelian varieties with CM by K reduces modulo a prime ideal p|p to a product of supersingular elliptic curves with the product polarization. We showed that for fixed K, such primes are bounded by a quantity related to the discriminant of K. We show that evil primes are ubiquitous in the sense that for any rational prime p, there are an infinite number of such CM fields K for which p is evil. (Assuming a standard conjecture, the result holds for a finite set of primes simultaneously.) The proof consists of two parts: (1) showing the surjectivity of the principally polarized abelian varieties with CM by K, for K satisfying some conditions, onto the superspecial points of the reduction modulo p of the Hilbert modular variety associated to the intermediate real quadratic field of K, and (2) showing the surjectivity of the superspecial points of the reduction modulo p of the Hilbert modular variety associated to a real quadratic field with large enough discriminant onto the superspecial points on the reduction modulo p of the Siegel moduli space parameterizing abelian surfaces with principal polarization.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.156
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mathematics Research NoticesSame topicAdvanced Mathematical IdentitiesFrench-language works237,207