MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044659244 · doi:10.1017/s1474748012000692

Extensions of differential representations of<b>SL</b><sub>2</sub>and tori

2012· article· en· W2044659244 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsDifferential algebraic geometryDifferential (mechanical device)Pure mathematicsTorusAlgebraic differential equationRepresentation theoryAlgebraic numberAlgebra over a fieldRepresentation (politics)Discrete mathematicsDifferential equationDifferential algebraic equationMathematical analysisOrdinary differential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Linear differential algebraic groups (LDAGs) measure differential algebraic dependencies among solutions of linear differential and difference equations with parameters, for which LDAGs are Galois groups. Differential representation theory is a key to developing algorithms computing these groups. In the rational representation theory of algebraic groups, one starts with ${\mathbf{SL} }_{2} $ and tori to develop the rest of the theory. In this paper, we give an explicit description of differential representations of tori and differential extensions of irreducible representation of ${\mathbf{SL} }_{2} $ . In these extensions, the two irreducible representations can be non-isomorphic. This is in contrast to differential representations of tori, which turn out to be direct sums of isotypic representations.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.235 · 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