Critical Groups of Simplicial Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We generalize the theory of critical groups from graphs to simplicial complexes. Specifically, given a simplicial complex, we define a family of abelian groups in terms of combinatorial Laplacian operators, generalizing the construction of the critical group of a graph. We show how to realize these critical groups explicitly as cokernels of reduced Laplacians, and prove that they are finite, with orders given by weighted enumerators of simplicial spanning trees. We describe how the critical groups of a complex represent flow along its faces, and sketch another potential interpretation as analogues of Chow groups. Nous généralisons la théorie des groupes critiques des graphes aux complexes simpliciaux. Plus précisément, pour un complexe simplicial, nous définissons une famille de groupes abéliens en termes d'opérateurs de Laplace combinatoires, qui généralise la construction du groupe critique d'un graphe. Nous montrons comment réaliser ces groupes critiques explicitement comme conoyaux des opérateurs de Laplace réduits combinatoires, et montrons qu'ils sont finis. Leurs ordres sont obtenus en comptant (avec des poids) des arbres simpliciaux couvrants. Nous décrivons comment les groupes critiques d'un complexe représentent le flux le long de ses faces, et esquissons une autre interprétation potentielle comme analogues des groupes de Chow.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".