Coxeter pairs, Ammann patterns, and Penrose-like tilings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We identify a precise geometric relationship between (i) certain natural pairs of irreducible reflection groups (``Coxeter pairs''), (ii) self-similar quasicrystalline patterns formed by superposing sets of 1D quasiperiodically spaced lines, planes or hyperplanes (``Ammann patterns''), and (iii) the tilings dual to these patterns (``Penrose-like tilings''). We use this relationship to obtain all irreducible Ammann patterns and their dual Penrose-like tilings, along with their key properties in a simple, systematic and unified way, expanding the number of known examples from four to infinity. For each symmetry, we identify the minimal Ammann patterns (those composed of the fewest 1d quasiperiodic sets) and construct the associated Penrose-like tilings: 11 in 2D, 9 in 3D, and one in 4D. These include the original Penrose tiling, the four other previously known Penrose-like tilings, and sixteen that are new. We also complete the enumeration of the quasicrystallographic space groups corresponding to the irreducible noncrystallographic reflection groups, by showing that there is a unique such space group in 4D (with nothing beyond 4D).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".