MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090755539 · doi:10.1007/s11511-007-0021-0

Limit shapes and the complex Burgers equation

2007· article· en· W2090755539 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Mathematica · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDavid and Lucile Packard FoundationInstitut Henri PoincaréCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiquePrinceton UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsHolomorphic functionMathematical analysisBurgers' equationBoundary (topology)Surface (topology)Limit (mathematics)Lipschitz continuityGravitational singularityInviscid flowPartial differential equationGeometryClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we study surfaces in R3 that arise as limit shapes in random surface models related to planar dimers. These limit shapes are surface tension minimizers, that is, they minimize a functional of the form ∫σ(∇h) dxdy among all Lipschitz functions h taking given values on the boundary of the domain. The surface tension σ has singularities and is not strictly convex, which leads to formation of facets and edges in the limit shapes. We find a change of variables that reduces the Euler–Lagrange equation for the variational problem to the complex inviscid Burgers equation (complex Hopf equation). The equation can thus be solved in terms of an arbitrary holomorphic function, which is somewhat similar in spirit to Weierstrass parametrization of minimal surfaces. We further show that for a natural dense set of boundary conditions, the holomorphic function in question is, in fact, algebraic. The tools of algebraic geometry can thus be brought in to study the minimizers and, especially, the formation of their singularities. This is illustrated by several explicitly computed examples.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.219 · 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