MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2207221696 · doi:10.2140/ant.2016.10.1091

Hoffmann’s conjecture for totally singular forms of prime degree

2016· article· en· W2207221696 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgebra & Number Theory · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConjecturePrime (order theory)Degree (music)Isotropic quadratic formIsotropyInvariant (physics)Quadratic equationFinite fieldField (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most significant discrete invariants of a quadratic form φ over a field k is its (full) splitting pattern, a finite sequence of integers which describes the possible isotropy behavior of φ under scalar extension to arbitrary overfields of k.A similarly important but more accessible variant of this notion is that of the Knebusch splitting pattern of φ, which captures the isotropy behavior of φ as one passes over a certain prescribed tower of k-overfields.We determine all possible values of this latter invariant in the case where φ is totally singular.This includes an extension of Karpenko's theorem (formerly Hoffmann's conjecture) on the possible values of the first Witt index to the totally singular case.Contrary to the existing approaches to this problem (in the nonsingular case), our results are achieved by means of a new structural result on the higher anisotropic kernels of totally singular quadratic forms.Moreover, the methods used here readily generalize to give analogous results for arbitrary Fermat-type forms of degree p over fields of characteristic p > 0. MSC2010: primary 11E04

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlgebra & Number TheorySame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207