MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139210144 · doi:10.1090/tran/7408

Yes, the “missing axiom” of matroid theory is lost forever

2018· preprint· lv· W2139210144 on OpenAlexafffund
Dillon Mayhew, Mike Newman, Geoff Whittle

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Mathematical Society · 2018
Typepreprint
Languagelv
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMatroidAxiomConjectureSentenceMathematicsCombinatoricsOrder (exchange)Field (mathematics)Discrete mathematicsPure mathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeometryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove there is no sentence in the monadic second-order language <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper M upper S 0"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>M</mml:mi> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>S</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">MS_{0}</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> that characterises when a matroid is representable over at least one field, and no sentence that characterises when a matroid is <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="double-struck upper K"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">K</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\mathbb {K}</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> -representable, for any infinite field <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="double-struck upper K"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">K</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\mathbb {K}</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> . By way of contrast, because Rota’s Conjecture is true, there is a sentence that characterises <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="double-struck upper F"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\mathbb {F}</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> -representable matroids, for any finite field <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="double-struck upper F"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">F</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\mathbb {F}</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> .

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.012
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Mathematical SocietySame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207