MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2534598819 · doi:10.1093/imrn/rnx270

Packing Curves on Surfaces with Few Intersections

2017· preprint· en· W2534598819 on OpenAlexaff
Tarik Aougab, Ian Biringer, Jonah Gaster

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mathematics Research Notices · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCombinatoricsGenusCircle packingMathematicsDegree (music)Surface (topology)Upper and lower boundsPolynomialSimple (philosophy)Zero (linguistics)GeometryMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Przytycki has shown that the size $\mathcal{N}_{k}(S)$ of a maximal collection of simple closed curves that pairwise intersect at most $k$ times on a topological surface $S$ grows at most as $|\chi(S)|^{k^{2}+k+1}$. In this article, we narrow Przytycki’s bounds, obtaining \[ \mathcal{N}_{k}(S) =O \left( \frac{ |\chi|^{3k}}{ ( \log |\chi| )^2 } \right)\!. \] In particular, the size of a maximal 1-system grows sub-cubically in $|\chi(S)|$. The proof uses a circle packing argument of Aougab and Souto and a bound for the number of curves of length at most $L$ on a hyperbolic surface. When the genus $g$ is fixed and the number of punctures $n$ grows, we use a different argument to show \[ \mathcal{N}_{k}(S) \leq O(n^{2k+2}). \] This may be improved when $k=2$, and we obtain the sharp estimate $\mathcal{N}_2(S)=\Theta(n^3)$.

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)0.006
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 score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.331
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mathematics Research NoticesSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207