MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177132318 · doi:10.1090/crmp/038/05

The Gysin map is compatible with mixed Hodge structures

2004· article· en· W3177132318 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Andrea de Cataldo, Luca Migliorini

Bibliographic record

VenueCRM proceedings & lecture notes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsMorphismInvertible matrixPure mathematicsCohomologyGroup (periodic table)Intersection (aeronautics)Algebra over a fieldPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The language of Bivariant Theory was developed in [6] and it turns out to be extremely useful in Intersection Theory and in Riemann-Roch-type questions (cfr. [5]). The Chowtheoretic version associates a graded group A∗(X f → Y ) with a morphism f : X → Y of algebraic schemes. There are a product structure, a proper push-forward and a pull-back. In the case of the structural mapX → Spec k, we find the Chow groups A∗(X → Spec k) ' A−∗(X), and in the case of the identity map the groups A∗(X Id → X) are called the Chow cohomology groups. When X is nonsingular these latter groups agree with the Chow groups:

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCRM proceedings & lecture notesSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207