MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109217769 · doi:10.70930/tac/tgge0jxc

Metric Spaces of Extreme Points

2020· article· en· W3109217769 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ernie Manes

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric spaceMathematicsMetric (unit)Computer sciencePure mathematicsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is shown that any compact metric space of diameter at most 2 embeds isometrically as a linearly independent set of extreme points of the unit ball of a separable Banach space.The proof illustrates how category theory can play a useful role in a problem of functional analysis.The well-known Arens-Eells embedding theorem [7] asserts that an arbitrary metric space may be isometrically embedded as a set of linearly independent vectors in a Banach space.We use elementary category theory to prove the following stronger result for compact metric spaces.Main Theorem Given a compact metric space (X, d) of diameter ≤ 2, there exists a separable real Banach space F (X, d) in which (X, d) may be isometrically embedded with image a linearly independent set of extreme points each of norm 1.This result is counterintuitive.For example, consider the case with (X, d) the unit interval.The isometry of the theorem provides a continuous curve in the "surface" of the unit sphere.Hence the image of such a curve can be a linearly independent set of extreme points.In the first section of the paper we will review some basic definitions and facts.In the second section we introduce free Banach spaces.The third section proves the main theorem using the free Banach space generated by a metric space.There is some literature concerned with categories of Banach spaces (see [9, 8, 2] and the references cited there).These develop interesting concepts which have little intersection with mainstream functional analysis.This paper attempts to demonstrate that such an intersection is possible.We thank the referee for helpful suggestions.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207