MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094808666 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2009-059-4

Numerical Semigroups That Are Not Intersections of<i>d</i>-Squashed Semigroups

2009· article· en· W2094808666 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCommutative Algebra and Its Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Regional Development FundUniversidad de CádizJunta de AndalucíaGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsMathematicsNumerical semigroupConjectureIntersection (aeronautics)SemigroupCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsPure mathematicsAlgebra over a field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We say that a numerical semigroup is d-squashed if it can be written in the form for N , a 1 , … , a d positive integers with gcd( a 1 , … , a d ) = 1. Rosales and Urbano have shown that a numerical semigroup is 2-squashed if and only if it is proportionally modular. Recent works by Rosales et al. give a concrete example of a numerical semigroup that cannot be written as an intersection of 2-squashed semigroups. We will show the existence of infinitely many numerical semigroups that cannot be written as an intersection of 2-squashed semigroups. We also will prove the same result for 3-squashed semigroups. We conjecture that there are numerical semigroups that cannot be written as the intersection of d -squashed semigroups for any fixed d , and we prove some partial results towards this conjecture.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0080.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.243 · 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