MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183537543 · doi:10.1142/s1005386721000298

Nil-Clean Rings with Involution

2021· article· en· W3183537543 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

VenueAlgebra Colloquium · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRings, Modules, and Algebras
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Anhui Province
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A [Formula: see text]-ring [Formula: see text] is called a nil [Formula: see text]-clean ring if every element of [Formula: see text] is a sum of a projection and a nilpotent. Nil [Formula: see text]-clean rings are the [Formula: see text]-version of nil-clean rings introduced by Diesl. This paper is about the nil [Formula: see text]-clean property of rings with emphasis on matrix rings. We show that a [Formula: see text]-ring [Formula: see text] is nil [Formula: see text]-clean if and only if [Formula: see text] is nil and [Formula: see text] is nil [Formula: see text]-clean. For a 2-primal [Formula: see text]-ring [Formula: see text], with the induced involution given by[Formula: see text], the nil [Formula: see text]-clean property of [Formula: see text] is completely reduced to that of [Formula: see text]. Consequently, [Formula: see text] is not a nil [Formula: see text]-clean ring for [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text] is a nil [Formula: see text]-clean ring if and only if [Formula: see text] is nil, [Formula: see text]is a Boolean ring and [Formula: see text] for all [Formula: see text].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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