MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007010982 · doi:10.1093/imrn/rnn027

The Log-Concavity Conjecture for the Duistermaat-Heckman Measure Revisited

2008· article· en· W2007010982 on OpenAlexaff
Yali Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mathematics Research Notices · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Algebra and Geometry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConjectureGeorge (robot)MathematicsMeasure (data warehouse)CombinatoricsHistoryComputer scienceArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Karshon constructed the first counterexample to the log-concavity conjecture for the Duistermaat–Heckman measure: a Hamiltonian six-manifold whose fixed-points set is the disjoint union of two copies of T4. In this article, for any closed symplectic four-manifold N with b+ > 1, we show that there is a Hamiltonian six-manifold M such that its fixed-points set is the disjoint union of two copies of N and such that its Duistermaat–Heckman function is not log-concave. On the other hand, we prove that if there is a torus action of complexity 2 such that all the symplectic reduced spaces taken at regular values satisfy the condition b+ = 1, then its Duistermaat–Heckman function has to be log-concave. As a consequence, we prove the log-concavity conjecture for Hamiltonian circle actions on six manifolds such that the fixed-points sets have no 4-dimensional components, or only have 4-dimensional pieces with b+ = 1.

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)0.007
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mathematics Research NoticesSame topicAdvanced Algebra and GeometryFrench-language works237,207