MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161789598 · doi:10.37193/cjm.2013.01.14

New proofs of some properties of essential submodules

2013· article· en· W3161789598 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarpathian Journal of Mathematics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRings, Modules, and Algebras
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofQuotientMathematicsCalculus (dental)Pure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1986, Lambek [Lambek, J., Lectures on rings and modules, Chelsea Publishing Company New York, 1986] studied the connections between essential submodules and quotient rings, and in 2009, Steinberg [Steinberg, S. A., Lattice-ordered rings and modules, Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London, 2009, 1–307] presented some interesting results in this field. The main aim of this paper is to provide proofs for those of these results for which we did not found old ones in the literature we studied, using the same techniques as in the mentioned books.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.212 · 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