MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044187568 · doi:10.1142/s0129167x20500883

Classification of spatial Lp AF algebras

2020· article· en· W3044187568 on OpenAlexaff
N. Christopher Phillips, Maria Grazia Viola

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mathematics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Operator Algebra Research
Canadian institutionsFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsOperator (biology)Countable setAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define spatial [Formula: see text] AF algebras for [Formula: see text], and prove the following analog of the Elliott AF algebra classification theorem. If [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] are spatial [Formula: see text] AF algebras, then the following are equivalent: [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] have isomorphic scaled preordered [Formula: see text]-groups. [Formula: see text] as rings. [Formula: see text] (not necessarily isometrically) as Banach algebras. [Formula: see text] is isometrically isomorphic to [Formula: see text] as Banach algebras. [Formula: see text] is completely isometrically isomorphic to [Formula: see text] as matricial [Formula: see text] operator algebras. As background, we develop the theory of matricial [Formula: see text] operator algebras, and show that there is a unique way to make a spatial [Formula: see text] AF algebra into a matricial [Formula: see text] operator algebra. We also show that any countable scaled Riesz group can be realized as the scaled preordered [Formula: see text]-group of a spatial [Formula: see text] AF algebra.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of MathematicsSame topicAdvanced Operator Algebra ResearchFrench-language works237,207