MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608463632 · doi:10.1090/amsip/038/23

Monodromy calculations of fourth order equations of Calabi-Yau type

2006· book-chapter· en· W2608463632 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAMS/IP studies in advanced mathematics · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNonlinear Waves and Solitons
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalabi–Yau manifoldMonodromyType (biology)MathematicsOrder (exchange)Pure mathematicsMathematical physicsGeologyEconomicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contains a preliminary study of the monodromy of certain fourth order differential equations, that were called of Calabi-Yau type in [3]. Some of these equations can be interpreted as the Picard-Fuchs equations of a Calabi-Yau manifold with one complex modulus, which links up the observed integrality to the conjectured integrality of the Gopakumar-Vafa invariants. A natural question is if in the other cases such a geometrical interpretation is also possible. Our investigations of the monodromies are intended as a first step in answering this question. We use a numerical approach combined with some ideas from homological mirror symmetry to determine the monodromy for some further oneparameter models. Furthermore, we present a conjectural identification of the Picard-Fuchs equation for 5 new examples from Borceas list and conjecture the existence of some new Calabi-Yau three folds. The paper does not contain any theorems or proofs but is, we think, nevertheless of interest. 1

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.290 · 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