Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the classical Frobenius problem, we introduce the Frobenius poset on the integers $\mathbb{Z}$, that is, for a sub-semigroup $\Lambda$ of the non-negative integers $(\mathbb{N},+)$, we define the order by $n \leq_{\Lambda} m$ if $m-n \in \Lambda$. When $\Lambda$ is generated by two relatively prime integers $a$ and $b$, we show that the order complex of an interval in the Frobenius poset is either contractible or homotopy equivalent to a sphere. We also show that when $\Lambda$ is generated by the integers $\{a,a+d,a+2d,\ldots,a+(a-1)d\}$, the order complex is homotopy equivalent to a wedge of spheres. Motivé par le problème de Frobenius classique, nous introduisons l'ensemble partiellement ordonné de Frobenius sur les entiers $\mathbb{Z}$, c.à.d. que pour un sous-semigroupe $\Lambda$ de les entiers non-négatifs $(\mathbb{N},+)$ nous définissons l'ordre par $n \leq_{\Lambda} m$ si $m-n \in \Lambda$. Quand le $\Lambda$ est engendré par deux nombres $a$ et $b$, relativement premiers entre eux, nous montrons que le complexe des chaînes d'un intervalle quelconque dans l'ensemble partiellement ordonné de Frobenius est soit contractible soit homotopiquement équivalent à une sphère. Nous montrons aussi que dans le cas où $\Lambda$ est engendré par les entiers $\{a,a+d,a+2d,\ldots,a+(a-1)d\}$, le complexe des chaînes a le type de homotopie d'un bouquet de sphères.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".