MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151758200 · doi:10.1145/504331.504334

Homotopies and polynomial system solving I

2001· article· en· W2151758200 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

VenueACM SIGSAM Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaplePolynomialTerminologyComputer scienceAlgebra over a fieldSystem of polynomial equationsMatrix polynomialMathematicsCalculus (dental)Applied mathematicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a survey of some basic ideas involved in the use of homotopies for solving systems of polynomial equations. These ideas are illustrated with many concrete examples. An introductory section on systems of polynomial equations and their solutions contains some necessary terminology that will be used in the sequel. We also describe a general algorithm to solve polynomial systems of n equations in n unknowns using homotopies. A Maple V implementation of the algorithm as well as a few accompanying Maple 6 worksheets are publicly available from the author's web page.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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