MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766534760 · doi:10.1093/imrn/rnx249

An Approach to Higher Teichmüller Spaces for General Groups

2017· article· en· W2766534760 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Le

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mathematics Research Notices · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsType (biology)Complement (music)Cluster (spacecraft)HeuristicsGroup (periodic table)Simple (philosophy)Pure mathematicsModuli spaceConstruct (python library)ComputationCombinatoricsAlgorithmComputer scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Let $S$ be a surface, $G$ a simply-connected semi-simple group, and $G'$ the associated adjoint form of the group. In Fock and Goncharov [4], the authors show that the moduli spaces of framed local systems $\mathcal{X}_{G',S}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{G,S}$ have the structure of cluster varieties when $G$ had type $A$. This was extended to classical groups in Le [12]. In this article, we give a method for constructing the cluster structure for general reductive groups $G$. The method depends on being able to carry out some explicit computations, and depends on some mild hypotheses, which we state, and which we believe hold in general. These hypotheses hold when $G$ has type $G_2,$ and therefore we are able to construct the cluster structure in this case. We also illustrate our approach by rederiving the cluster structure for $G$ of type $A$. Our goals are to give some heuristics for the approach taken in Le [12], point out the difficulties that arise for more general groups, and to record some useful calculations. Forthcoming work by Goncharov and Shen gives a different approach to constructing the cluster structure on $\mathcal{X}_{G',S}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{G,S}$. We hope that some of the ideas here complement their more comprehensive work.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mathematics Research NoticesSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207