MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325585455 · doi:10.4153/cjm-2004-033-0

Fat Points in ℙ<sup>1</sup>× ℙ<sup>1</sup>and Their Hilbert Functions

2004· article· en· W2325585455 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Mathematics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsFunction (biology)Resolution (logic)Hilbert series and Hilbert polynomialHilbert spaceCombinatoricsConstant (computer programming)Point (geometry)Mathematical analysisPure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the Hilbert functions of fat points in ℙ 1 × ℙ 1 . If Z ⊆ ℙ 1 × ℙ 1 is an arbitrary fat point scheme, then it can be shown that for every i and j the values of the Hilbert function H Z ( l , j ) and H Z ( i , l ) eventually become constant for l ≫ 0. We show how to determine these eventual values by using only the multiplicities of the points, and the relative positions of the points in ℙ 1 × ℙ 1 . This enables us to compute all but a finite number values of H Z without using the coordinates of points. We also characterize the ACM fat point schemes using our description of the eventual behaviour. In fact, in the case that Z ⊆ ℙ 1 × ℙ 1 is ACM, then the entire Hilbert function and its minimal free resolution depend solely on knowing the eventual values of the Hilbert function.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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