MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952437841 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1310.8260

The Newton tree: geometric interpretation and applications to the motivic zeta function and the log canonical threshold

2013· preprint· en· W2952437841 on OpenAlexaff
Willem Veys

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Riemann zeta functionMathematicsFunction (biology)Tree (set theory)Pure mathematicsApplied mathematicsCombinatoricsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let I be an arbitrary ideal in C[[x,y]]. We use the Newton algorithm to compute by induction the motivic zeta function of the ideal, yielding only few poles, associated to the faces of the successive Newton polygons. We associate a minimal Newton tree to I, related to using good coordinates in the Newton algorithm, and show that it has a conceptual geometric interpretation in terms of the log canonical model of I. We also compute the log canonical threshold from a Newton polygon and strengthen Corti's inequalities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207