Combinatorial Hopf Algebras and Towers of Algebras
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it