MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126193701 · doi:10.1017/s0143385708080528

Conjugacy, orbit equivalence and classification of measure-preserving group actions

2008· article· en· W2126193701 on OpenAlexaff
Asger Törnquist

Bibliographic record

VenueErgodic Theory and Dynamical Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topology and Set Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsErgodic theoryConjugacy classCountable setAbelian groupMeasure (data warehouse)Standard probability spaceEquivalence (formal languages)Almost everywhereSecond-countable spaceGroup (periodic table)Free groupOrbit (dynamics)Probability measurePure mathematicsCombinatoricsDiscrete groupDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We prove that if G is a countable discrete group with property (T) over an infinite subgroup H≤G which contains an infinite Abelian subgroup or is normal, then G has continuum-many orbit-inequivalent measure-preserving almost-everywhere-free ergodic actions on a standard Borel probability space. Further, we obtain that the measure-preserving almost-everywhere-free ergodic actions of such a G cannot be classified up to orbit equivalence by a reasonable assignment of countable structures as complete invariants. We also obtain a strengthening and a new proof of a non-classification result of Foreman and Weiss for conjugacy of measure-preserving ergodic almost-everywhere-free actions of discrete countable groups.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgodic Theory and Dynamical SystemsSame topicAdvanced Topology and Set TheoryFrench-language works237,207