MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962929143 · doi:10.46298/dmtcs.3634

Combinatorial Hopf Algebras and Towers of Algebras

2008· article· fr· W2962929143 on OpenAlexafffund
Nantel Bergeron, Thomas Lam, Huilan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHopf algebraMathematicsDual polyhedronTowerCombinatoricsQuasitriangular Hopf algebraAxiomPure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldGeometryDivision algebraSubalgebraGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bergeron and Li have introduced a set of axioms which guarantee that the Grothendieck groups of a tower of algebras $\bigoplus_{n \geq 0}A_n$ can be endowed with the structure of graded dual Hopf algebras. Hivert and Nzeutzhap, and independently Lam and Shimozono constructed dual graded graphs from primitive elements in Hopf algebras. In this paper we apply the composition of these constructions to towers of algebras. We show that if a tower $\bigoplus_{n \geq 0}A_n$ gives rise to graded dual Hopf algebras then we must have $\dim (A_n)=r^nn!$ where $r = \dim (A_1)$. Bergeron et Li ont donné un ensemble d'axiomes qui garanti que les groupes de Grothendieck d'une tour d'algèbres $\bigoplus_{n \geq 0}A_n$ peuvent être dotés d'une structure d'algèbres de Hopf graduées duales. Hivert et Nzeutzhap, et indépen\-damment Lam et Shimozono, ont construit des graphes gradués duals à partir d'éléments primitifs dans des algèbres de Hopf. Dans cet article, nous appliquons la composition de ces constructions aux tours des algèbres. Nous prouvons que si une tour $\bigoplus_{n \geq 0}A_n$ donne des algèbres de Hopf graduées duales, alors nous devons avoir $\dim (A_n)=r^nn!$ où $r = \dim (A_1)$.

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)0.001
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer ScienceSame topicAdvanced Combinatorial MathematicsFrench-language works237,207