MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969825150 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1908.08110

On the Clifford Algebraic Description of the Geometry of a 3D Euclidean Space

2019· preprint· en· W2969825150 on OpenAlexaff
Jayme Vaz, Stephen Mann

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic and Geometric Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClifford algebraLinear subspaceMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldEuclidean spaceGeometric algebraEuclidean geometryDuality (order theory)Projection (relational algebra)CombinatoricsPure mathematicsGeometryAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss how transformations in a three dimensional euclidean space can be described in terms of the Clifford algebra $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,3}$ of the quadratic space $\mathbb{R}^{3,3}$. We show that this algebra describes in a unified way the operations of reflection, rotations (circular and hyperbolic), translation, shear and non-uniform scale. Moreover, using the concept of Hodge duality, we define an operation called cotranslation, and show that the operation of perspective projection can be written in this Clifford algebra as a composition of the translation and cotranslation operations. We also show that the operation of pseudo-perspective can be implemented using the cotranslation operation. An important point is that the expression for the operations of reflection and rotation in $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,3}$ preserve the subspaces that can be associated with the algebras $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,0}$ and $\mathcal{C}\ell_{0,3}$, so that reflection and rotation can be expressed in terms of $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,0}$ or $\mathcal{C}\ell_{0,3}$, as well-known. However, all other operations mix those subspaces in such a way that they need to be expressed in terms of the full Clifford algebra $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,3}$. An essential aspect of our formulation is the representation of points in terms of objects called paravectors. Paravectors have been used previously to represents points in terms of an algebra closely related to the Clifford algebra $\mathcal{C}\ell_{3,3}$. We compare these different approaches.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.103 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAlgebraic and Geometric AnalysisFrench-language works237,207