MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979043879 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2005-004-2

Degree Homogeneous Subgroups

2005· article· en· W1979043879 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
A. Rahnamai Barghi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFinite Group Theory Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsDegree (music)HomogeneousCombinatoricsCharacter (mathematics)Abelian groupNormal subgroupGroup (periodic table)Pure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Let G be a finite group and H be a subgroup. We say that H is degree homogeneous if, for each χ ∈ Irr(G), all the irreducible constituents of the restriction χH have the same degree. Subgroups which are either normal or abelian are obvious examples of degree homogeneous subgroups. Following a question by E.M. Zhmud’, we investigate general properties of such subgroups. It appears unlikely that degree homogeneous subgroups can be characterized entirely by abstract group properties, but we providemixed criteria (involving both group structure and character properties) which are both necessary and sufficient. For example, H is degree homogeneous in G if and only if the derived subgroup H′ is normal in G and, for every pair α, β of irreducible G-conjugate characters of H′, all irreducible constituents of αH and βH have the same degree.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Mathematical BulletinSame topicFinite Group Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207