MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799154414 · doi:10.5802/aif.3393

Stratified spaces and synthetic Ricci curvature bounds

2021· article· lv· W2799154414 on OpenAlexaff
Jérôme Bertrand, C. Ketterer, Ilaria Mondello, Thomas Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales de l’institut Fourier · 2021
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric Analysis and Curvature Flows
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMathematicsRicci curvatureIsoperimetric inequalityPure mathematicsScalar curvatureCurvatureRiemann curvature tensorMathematical analysisDivisor (algebraic geometry)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove that a compact stratified space satisfies the Riemannian curvature-dimension condition RCD ( K , N ) if and only if its Ricci tensor is bounded below by K ∈ ℝ on the regular set, the cone angle along the stratum of codimension two is smaller than or equal to 2 π and its dimension is at most equal to N . This gives a new wide class of geometric examples of metric measure spaces satisfying the RCD ( K , N ) curvature-dimension condition, including for instance spherical suspensions, orbifolds, Kähler–Einstein manifolds with a divisor, Einstein manifolds with conical singularities along a curve. We also obtain new analytic and geometric results on stratified spaces, such as Bishop–Gromov volume inequality, Laplacian comparison, Lévy–Gromov isoperimetric inequality. Our result also implies a similar characterization of compact stratified spaces carrying a lower curvature bound in the sense of Alexandrov.

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)0.004
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales de l’institut FourierSame topicGeometric Analysis and Curvature FlowsFrench-language works237,207