MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140956707 · doi:10.4171/dm/145

Essential dimension: A functorial point of view (after A. Merkurjev)

2003· article· en· W2140956707 on OpenAlexaff
Grégory Berhuy

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumenta Mathematica · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsFunctorDimension (graph theory)Algebraically closed fieldAlgebraic numberCohomological dimensionAlgebraic groupInvariant (physics)Field (mathematics)Group (periodic table)Complex dimensionAlgebraic number fieldPure mathematicsHomotopy groupHomotopyCombinatoricsCohomologyMathematical analysisMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In these notes we develop a systematic study of the essential dimension of functors. This approach is due to A. Merkurjev and can be found in his unpublished notes [12]. The notion of essential dimension was earlier introduced for finite groups by J. Buhler and Z. Reichstein in [3] and for an arbitrary algebraic group over an algebraically closed field by Z. Reichstein in [14]. This is a numerical invariant depending on the group G and the field k . This number is denoted by \operatorname{ed}_k(G) . In this paper we insist on the behaviour of the essential dimension under field extension k'/k and try to compute \operatorname{ed}_k(G) for any k . This will be done in particular for the group \mathbb Z/n when n\leq5 and for the circle group. Along the way we define the essential dimension of functor with versal pairs and prove that all the different notions of essential dimension agree in the case of algebraic groups. Applications to finite groups are given. Finally we give a proof of the so-called homotopy invariance, that is \operatorname{ed}_k(G)=\operatorname{ed}_{k(t)}(G) , for an algebraic group G defined over an infinite field k .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.011
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations112
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumenta MathematicaSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207