MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739418065 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1707.05890

Towards an Intersection Chow Cohomology Theory for GIT Quotients

2017· preprint· en· W2739418065 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Edidin, Matthew Satriano

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSurjective functionModuli spacePure mathematicsPicard groupStack (abstract data type)ModuloGeometric invariant theoryQuotientCohomologyIntersection theoryEquivalence class (music)Group (periodic table)Algebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the Fulton-Macpherson operational Chow rings of good moduli spaces of properly stable, smooth, Artin stacks. Such spaces are étale locally isomorphic to geometric invariant theory quotients of affine schemes, and are therefore natural extensions of GIT quotients. Our main result is that, with rational coefficients, every operational class can be represented by a so-called topologically strong cycle on the corresponding stack. Moreover, this cycle is unique modulo rational equivalence on the stack. Using out methods, we prove that if $X$ is the good moduli space of a properly stable, smooth, Artin stack then the natural map from the Picard group of $X$ to the first operational Chow group of $X$ is surjective with rational coefficients.

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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.127 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207