MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322979489 · doi:10.14288/1.0072343

Diophantine problems in polynomial theory

2011· article· en· W2322979489 on OpenAlexaff
Paul David Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPolynomialDiophantine equationCalculus (dental)Algebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematicsMathematical economicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Algebraic curves and surfaces are playing an increasing role in modern mathematics. From the well known applications to cryptography, to computer vision and manufacturing, studying these curves is a prevalent problem that is appearing more often. With the advancement of computers, dramatic progress has been made in all branches of algebraic computation. In particular, computer algebra software has made it much easier to find rational or integral points on algebraic curves. Computers have also made it easier to obtain rational parametrizations of certain curves and surfaces. Each algebraic curve has an associated genus, essentially a classification, that determines its topological structure. Advancements on methods and theory on curves of genus 0, 1 and 2 have been made in recent years. Curves of genus 0 are the only algebraic curves that you can obtain a rational parametrization for. Curves of genus 1 (also known as elliptic curves) have the property that their rational points have a group structure and thus one can call upon the massive field of group theory to help with their study. Curves of higher genus (such as genus 2) do not have the background and theory that genus 0 and 1 do but recent advancements in theory have rapidly expanded advancements on the topic. In this thesis, we will first outline some methods used to find rational and integral points on curves of genus 0, 1, and 2. We will then solve some new problems related to polynomial theory that require finding the solutions to systems of Diophantine equations. We are required to find rational or integral points on algebraic curves to garner the solutions to these systems.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207