MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325005816 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2016-047-3

On Chromatic Functors and Stable Partitions of Graphs

2016· article· en· W2325005816 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ye Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsFunctorChromatic polynomialAutomorphismChromatic scaleCombinatoricsGraphDiscrete mathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The chromatic functor of a simple graph is a functorization of the chromatic polynomial. M. Yoshinaga showed that two ûnite graphs have isomorphic chromatic functors if and only if they have the same chromatic polynomial. The key ingredient in the proof is the use of stable partitions of graphs. The latter is shown to be closely related to chromatic functors. In this note, we further investigate some interesting properties of chromatic functors associated with simple graphs using stable partitions. Our ûrst result is the determination of the group of natural automorphisms of the chromatic functor, which is, in general, a larger group than the automorphism group of the graph. The second result is that the composition of the chromatic functor associated with a ûnite graph restricted to the category FI of ûnite sets and injections with the free functor into the category of complex vector spaces yields a consistent sequence of representations of symmetric groups that is representation stable in the sense of Church–Farb.

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)0.003
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Mathematical BulletinSame topicAdvanced Combinatorial MathematicsFrench-language works237,207