MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159165082 · doi:10.1112/s0010437x09004023

Noncrossing partitions and representations of quivers

2009· article· en· W2159165082 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueCompositio Mathematica · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoxeter groupBijectionQuiverCoxeter elementRepresentation theoryContext (archaeology)Bijection, injection and surjectionCluster algebraWeyl group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We situate the noncrossing partitions associated with a finite Coxeter group within the context of the representation theory of quivers. We describe Reading’s bijection between noncrossing partitions and clusters in this context, and show that it extends to the extended Dynkin case. Our setup also yields a new proof that the noncrossing partitions associated with a finite Coxeter group form a lattice. We also prove some new results within the theory of quiver representations. We show that the finitely generated, exact abelian, and extension-closed subcategories of the representations of a quiver Q without oriented cycles are in natural bijection with the cluster tilting objects in the associated cluster category. We also show that these subcategories are exactly the finitely generated categories that can be obtained as the semistable objects with respect to some stability condition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations129
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCompositio MathematicaSame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207