MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777186554 · doi:10.1142/s021919971950024x

A quasi-Hopf algebra for the triplet vertex operator algebra

2019· article· en· W2777186554 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Contemporary Mathematics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVertex operator algebraQuantum groupCellular algebraOperator algebraFiltered algebraAlgebra representationCurrent algebraAlgebra over a fieldQuantum algebraGroup algebra

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give a new factorizable ribbon quasi-Hopf algebra [Formula: see text], whose underlying algebra is that of the restricted quantum group for [Formula: see text] at a [Formula: see text]th root of unity. The representation category of [Formula: see text] is conjecturally ribbon equivalent to that of the triplet vertex operator algebra (VOA) [Formula: see text]. We obtain [Formula: see text] via a simple current extension from the unrolled restricted quantum group at the same root of unity. The representation category of the unrolled quantum group is conjecturally equivalent to that of the singlet VOA [Formula: see text], and our construction is parallel to extending [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text]. We illustrate the procedure in the simpler example of passing from the Hopf algebra for the group algebra [Formula: see text] to a quasi-Hopf algebra for [Formula: see text], which corresponds to passing from the Heisenberg VOA to a lattice extension.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Contemporary MathematicsSame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207