MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2213792970 · doi:10.1142/s0129167x19500472

Bott–Taubes–Vassiliev cohomology classes by cut-and-paste topology

2019· preprint· en· W2213792970 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robin Koytcheff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mathematics · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsCohomologyEuclidean geometryGraphPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldCombinatoricsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bott and Taubes used integrals over configuration spaces to produce finite-type a.k.a. Vassiliev knot invariants. Cattaneo, Cotta-Ramusino and Longoni then used these methods together with graph cohomology to construct “Vassiliev classes” in the real cohomology of spaces of knots in higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces, as first promised by Kontsevich. Here we construct integer-valued cohomology classes in spaces of knots and links in [Formula: see text] for [Formula: see text]. We construct such a class for any integer-valued graph cocycle, by the method of gluing compactified configuration spaces. Our classes form the integer lattice among the previously discovered real cohomology classes. Thus we obtain nontrivial classes from trivalent graph cocycles. Our methods generalize to yield mod-[Formula: see text] classes out of mod-[Formula: see text] graph cocycles, which need not be reductions of classes over the integers.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of MathematicsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207