MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142122693

Iwasawa Theory of Fine Selmer Groups

2020· dissertation· en· W3142122693 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Debanjana Kundu

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacsUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMathematics educationMathematicsPsychologyPure mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iwasawa theory began as a Galois module theory of ideal class groups, initiated by Kenkichi Iwasawa as part of the theory of cyclotomic fields. In the early 1970s, Barry Mazur considered generalizations of Iwasawa theory to Selmer groups of elliptic curves (Abelian varieties in general). At the turn of this century, Coates and Sujatha initiated the study of a subgroup of the Selmer group of an elliptic curve called the fine Selmer group. The focus of this thesis is to understand arithmetic properties of this subgroup. In particular, we understand the structure of fine Selmer groups and their growth patterns. We investigate a strong analogy between the growth of the p-rank of the fine Selmer group and the growth of the p-rank of the class groups. This is done in the classical Iwasawa theoretic setting of (multiple) Zp-extensions; but what is more striking is that this analogy can be extended to non-p-adic analytic extensions as well, where standard Iwasawa theoretic tools fail. Coates and Sujatha proposed two conjectures on the structure of the fine Selmer groups. Conjecture A is viewed as a generalization of the classical Iwasawa μ=0 conjecture to the context of the motive associated to an elliptic curve; whereas Conjecture B is in the spirit of generalising Greenberg's pseudonullity conjecture to elliptic curves. We provide new evidence towards these two conjectures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207