MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Manifold Homotopy via the Flow Complex

2009· article· en· W2134519136 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

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 ℝ n are distributed into two groups, one lying close to Σ itself, called the shallow , 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 ℝ n , 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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.020
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