MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603899751 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2017-019-3

Additive Maps on Units of Rings

2017· article· en· W2603899751 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Tamer Koşan, Serap Şahinkaya, Yiqiang Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topics in Algebra
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersGebze Teknik ÜniversitesiMemorial University of NewfoundlandTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu
KeywordsMathematicsUnit (ring theory)Ring (chemistry)CombinatoricsProduct (mathematics)Field (mathematics)Pure mathematicsGeometryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Let R be a ring. A map f: R → R is additive if f(a + b) = f(a) + f(b) for all elements a and b of R. Here, a map f: R → R is called unit-additive if f(u + v) = f(u) + f(v) for all units u and v of R. Motivated by a recent result of Xu, Pei and Yi showing that, for any field F, every unit-additive map of (F) is additive for all n ≥ z, this paper is about the question of when every unit-additivemap of a ring is additive. It is proved that every unit-additivemap of a semilocal ring R is additive if and only if either R has no homomorphic image isomorphic to or R/J(R) ≅ with 2 = 0 in R. Consequently, for any semilocal ring R, every unit-additive map of (R) is additive for all n ≥ 2. These results are further extended to rings R such that R/J(R) is a direct product of exchange rings with primitive factors Artinian. A unit-additive map f of a ring R is called unithomomorphic if f(uv) = f(u)f(v) for all units u, v of R. As an application, the question of when every unit-homomorphic map of a ring is an endomorphism is addressed.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Mathematical BulletinSame topicAdvanced Topics in AlgebraFrench-language works237,207