MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2261870129 · doi:10.1063/1.4976741

<i>N</i>≥ 𝟐 symmetric superpolynomials

2017· article· he· W2261870129 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languagehe
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y TecnológicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHomogeneous functionMultiplicative functionMonomialHomogeneousSymmetric functionFormalism (music)Scalar multiplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory of symmetric functions has been extended to the case where each variable is paired with an anticommuting one. The resulting expressions, dubbed superpolynomials, provide the natural N=1 supersymmetric version of the classical bases of symmetric functions. Here we consider the case where more than one independent anticommuting variable is attached to each ordinary variable. First, the N=2 super-version of the monomial, elementary, homogeneous symmetric functions, as well as the power sums, is constructed systematically (using an exterior-differential formalism for the multiplicative bases), these functions being now indexed by a novel type of superpartitions. Moreover, the scalar product of power sums turns out to have a natural N=2 generalization which preserves the duality between the monomial and homogeneous bases. All these results are then generalized to an arbitrary value of N. Finally, for N=2, the scalar product and the homogeneous functions are shown to have a one-parameter deformation, a result that prepares the ground for the yet-to-be-defined N=2 Jack superpolynomials.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207