MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994674240 · doi:10.1017/s1446788700036909

Baer and quasi-Baer properties of group rings

2007· article· en· W1994674240 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Australian Mathematical Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRings, Modules, and Algebras
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of NewfoundlandChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsMathematicsRing (chemistry)Group ringGroup (periodic table)AutomorphismIdeal (ethics)AnnihilatorIdempotenceFinite groupPure mathematicsCombinatoricsAlgebra over a fieldChemistryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A ring R is said to be a Baer (respectively, quasi-Baer) ring if the left annihilator of any nonempty subset (respectively, any ideal) of R is generated by an idempotent. It is first proved that for a ring R and a group G , if a group ring RG is (quasi-) Baer then so is R; if in addition G is finite then |G| –1 € R . Counter examples are then given to answer Hirano's question which asks whether the group ring RG is (quasi-) Baer if R is (quasi-) Baer and G is a finite group with |G| –1 € R . Further, efforts have been made towards answering the question of when the group ring RG of a finite group G is (quasi-) Baer, and various (quasi-) Baer group rings are identified. For the case where G is a group acting on R as automorphisms, some sufficient conditions are given for the fixed ring R G to be Baer.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.233 · 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