Mini-Workshop: Arithmetik von Gruppenringen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mini workshop "Arithmetic of group rings" was attended by 16 participants from Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Romania and Spain. The expertise was a good mixture between senior and young researchers. It was a very stimulating experience and thesize of the group allowed excellent discussions amongst all participants. Very fruitful were the problem sessions, resulting in the problems listed at the end of this report. The main highlights of the conference were: The complete calculation of the projective Schur subgroup of the Brauer group by Aljadeff and del Rio. Hertweck's solution of the first Zassenhaus conjecture for finite metacyclic groups. the description of special subgroups of the unit group of integral group rings, such as the hypercentre and the finite conjugacy centre, and the relation with respect to the normalizer of the trivial units. discussion of the present state of art via several survey talks presented and the problem sessions The group G determines its integral group ring \mathbb Z G and its group V(\mathbb Z G) of normalized units. Several talks addressed the interplay of the cohomological properties of these three objects. Further topics included twisted group rings, group rings over local rings, polynomial growth and identities, orders and semigroup rings, Lie structure, representation-theoretic and algorithmic methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".