MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736842186 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v9n4p196

On FGDF-modules

2017· article· en· W2736842186 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alhousseynou Ba, Sidy Demba Touré, Oumar Diankha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRings, Modules, and Algebras
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsNoetherianFlat modulePure mathematicsFinitely-generated abelian groupIndecomposable moduleGeneralizationNoetherian ringUnitary stateUnitalDedekind cutDiscrete mathematicsProjective moduleAlgebra over a fieldMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let R be a unital ring and M a unitary module not necessary over R. The FGDF-module is a generalization of FGDF-rings (Touré, Diop, Mohamed and Sangharé, 2014). In this work, we first give some properties of FGDF-modules. After that, we show that for a finitely generated module M, M is a FGDF-module if and only if M is of finite representation type module. Finally, we show that M is a finitely generated FGDF-module if and only if every Dedekind finite module of $\sigma[M]$ is noetherian.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.245
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicRings, Modules, and AlgebrasFrench-language works237,207