MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114015893 · doi:10.1002/malq.201200079

Cofinalities of Borel ideals

2014· article· en· W2114015893 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

VenueMathematical logic quarterly · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topology and Set Theory
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
FundersConsejo de Ciencia y Tecnología del Estado de ChiapasUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoAkademie Věd České RepublikyGrantová Agentura České Republiky
KeywordsCofinalityMathematicsInvariant (physics)Ideal (ethics)Uncountable setPairwise comparisonPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsCountable setEpistemologyStatisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the possible values of the cofinality invariant for various Borel ideals on the natural numbers. We introduce the notions of a fragmented and gradually fragmented ideal and prove a dichotomy for fragmented ideals. We show that every gradually fragmented ideal has cofinality consistently strictly smaller than the cardinal invariant and produce a model where there are uncountably many pairwise distinct cofinalities of gradually fragmented ideals.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.286 · 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