MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963672388 · doi:10.1142/s0218216519500196

L-spaces, left-orderability and two-bridge knots

2018· article· en· W2963672388 on OpenAlexaff
Idrissa Bâ

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersChalmers Tekniska Högskola
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsKnot (papermaking)ConjectureCovering spaceFundamental groupCover (algebra)Cyclic groupAbelian group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that the 3-fold cyclic branched cover of any genus 2 two-bridge knot [Formula: see text] is an L-space and its fundamental group is not left-orderable. Therefore, the family of 3-fold cyclic branched cover of any genus 2 two-bridge knot [Formula: see text] verifies the [Formula: see text]-space conjecture. We also show that if [Formula: see text] is a two-bridge knot with [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], then the fundamental group of the 5-fold cyclic branched cover of [Formula: see text] is not left-orderable, which will complete the proof that the fundamental group of the 5-fold cyclic branched cover of any genus 1 two-bridge knot is not left-orderable.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Knot Theory and Its RamificationsSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207