MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410686863 · doi:10.4171/ggd/356

Effective coherence of groups discriminated by a locally quasi-convex hyperbolic group

2016· preprint· en· W2410686863 on OpenAlexafffund
Inna Bumagin, Jeremy Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueGroups Geometry and Dynamics · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsEmbeddingAbelian groupCentralizer and normalizerIterated functionFinitely-generated abelian groupGroup (periodic table)Torsion (gastropod)Regular polygonDecidabilityPure mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsComputer scienceMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove that every finitely generated group G discriminated by a locally quasi-convex torsion-free hyperbolic group \Gamma is effectively coherent: that is, presentations for finitely generated subgroups can be computed from the subgroup generators. We study G via its embedding into an iterated centralizer extension of \Gamma , and prove that this embedding can be computed. We also give algorithms to enumerate all finitely generated groups discriminated by \Gamma and to decide whether a given group, with decidable word problem, is discriminated by \Gamma . If \Gamma may have torsion, we prove that groups obtained from \Gamma by iterated amalgamated products with virtually abelian groups, over elementary subgroups, are effectively coherent.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGroups Geometry and DynamicsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207