MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Manifold Homotopy via the Flow Complex

2009· article· en· W2134519136 on OpenAlexaff
Bardia Sadri

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomotopySubmanifoldMathematicsManifold (fluid mechanics)Dimension (graph theory)Pure mathematicsFlow (mathematics)Filtration (mathematics)Critical point (mathematics)Function (biology)Sample (material)Mathematical analysisGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is known that the critical points of the distance function induced by a dense sample P of a submanifold Σ of ℝnare distributed into two groups, one lying close to Σ itself, called theshallow, and the other close to medial axis of Σ, called deep critical points. We prove that under (uniform) sampling assumption, the union of stable manifolds of the shallow critical points have the same homotopy type as Σ itself and the union of the stable manifolds of the deep critical points have the homotopy type of the complement of Σ. The separation of critical points under uniform sampling entails a separation in terms of distance of critical points to the sample. This means that if a given sample is dense enough with respect to two or more submanifolds of ℝn, the homotopy types of all such submanifolds together with those of their complements are captured as unions of stable manifolds of shallow versus those of deep critical points, in a filtration of the flow complex based on the distance of critical points to the sample. This results in an algorithm for homotopic manifold reconstruction when the target dimension is unknown.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicTopological and Geometric Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207