MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952350480 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.math/0408153

Root numbers and ranks in positive characteristic

2004· preprint· en· W2952350480 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Conrad, Keith Conrad, H. A. Helfgott

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsConjectureElliptic curveRank (graph theory)CombinatoricsParity (physics)Function fieldField (mathematics)Discrete mathematicsPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a global field K and an elliptic curve E_eta over K(T), Silverman's specialization theorem implies that rank(E_eta(K(T))) <= rank(E_t(K)) for all but finitely many t in P^1(K). If this inequality is strict for all but finitely many t, the elliptic curve E_eta is said to have elevated rank. All known examples of elevated rank for K=Q rest on the parity conjecture for elliptic curves over Q, and the examples are all isotrivial. Some additional standard conjectures over Q imply that there does not exist a non-isotrivial elliptic curve over Q(T) with elevated rank. In positive characteristic, an analogue of one of these additional conjectures is false. Inspired by this, for the rational function field K = kappa(u) over any finite field kappa with odd characteristic, we construct an explicit 2-parameter family E_{c,d} of non-isotrivial elliptic curves over K(T) (depending on arbitrary c, d in kappa^*) such that, under the parity conjecture, each E_{c,d} has elevated rank.

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)0.005
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207