MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516033148 · doi:10.4171/jems/665

Triple Massey products and Galois theory

2016· preprint· en· W2516033148 on OpenAlexaff
Ján Mináč, Nguyêñ Duy Tân

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the European Mathematical Society · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsGalois groupConjecturePrime (order theory)Product (mathematics)QuotientTriple productAbsolute Galois groupPure mathematicsField (mathematics)Galois theoryCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that any triple Massey product with respect to prime 2 contains 0 whenever it is defined over any field. This extends the theorem of M. J. Hopkins and K. G. Wickelgren, from global fields to any fields. This is the first time when the vanishing of any n -Massey product for some prime p has been established for all fields. This leads to a strong restriction on the shape of relations in the maximal pro-2-quotients of absolute Galois groups, which was out of reach until now. We also develop an extension of Serre's transgression method to detect triple commutators in relations of pro- p -groups, where we do not require that all cup products vanish. We prove that all n -Massey products, n \geq 3 , vanish for general Demushkin groups. We formulate and provide evidence for two conjectures related to the structure of absolute Galois groups of fields. In each case when these conjectures can be verified, they have some interesting concrete Galois theoretic consequences. They are also related to the Bloch–Kato conjecture.

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 score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the European Mathematical SocietySame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207