MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094168838 · doi:10.1142/s0219498811005105

I-COMPACT RIGHT CHAIN DOMAINS

2011· article· en· W2094168838 on OpenAlexaff
H. H. Brungs, Günter Törner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Algebra and Its Applications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRings, Modules, and Algebras
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsValuation ringKrull dimensionValuation (finance)Commutative ringMinimal idealAssociated primeInvariant (physics)Regular local ringPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsPrime (order theory)Ideal (ethics)Commutative propertyMaximal idealCombinatoricsNoetherianAlgebra over a fieldField (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generalizing the concept of convergency to valued fields, Ostrowski in the 1930s introduced pseudo-convergent sequences. In the present paper we classify pseudo-convergent sequences in right chain domains R according to the prime ideal P associated to the breadth I of the sequence using an ideal theory developed for right cones in groups. The ring R is I-compact if every pseudo-convergent sequence in R with breadth I has a limit in R, and we construct right chain domains R which are I-compact only for right ideals I in particular subsets [Formula: see text] of the set of all right ideals of R. Krull's perfect valuation rings and then Ribenboim's notion of a valuation ring complete par étages, where [Formula: see text] is the minimal set containing the completely prime ideals in a commutative valuation ring, is a special case. For a non-discrete right invariant rank-one right chain domain R there are exactly two possibilities for the set [Formula: see text] if the value group of R is the group of real numbers under addition, and there are infinitely many possibilities for [Formula: see text] in all other cases.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Algebra and Its ApplicationsSame topicRings, Modules, and AlgebrasFrench-language works237,207