Albert algebras over rings and related torsors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We study exceptional Jordan algebras and related exceptional group schemes over commutative rings from a geometric point of view, using appropriate torsors to parametrize and explain classical and new constructions, and proving that over rings, they give rise to nonisomorphic structures. We begin by showing that isotopes of Albert algebras are obtained as twists by a certain $\mathrm F_4$ -torsor with total space a group of type $\mathrm E_6$ and, using this, that Albert algebras over rings in general admit nonisomorphic isotopes even in the split case, as opposed to the situation over fields. We then consider certain $\mathrm D_4$ -torsors constructed from reduced Albert algebras, and show how these give rise to a class of generalised reduced Albert algebras constructed from compositions of quadratic forms. Showing that this torsor is nontrivial, we conclude that the Albert algebra does not uniquely determine the underlying composition, even in the split case. In a similar vein, we show that a given reduced Albert algebra can admit two coordinate algebras which are nonisomorphic and have nonisometric quadratic forms, contrary, in a strong sense, to the case over fields, established by Albert and Jacobson.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".