MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185445421 · doi:10.4171/jems/1123

Motivic integration and Milnor fiber

2021· article· en· W3185445421 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Goulwen Fichou, Yimu Yin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the European Mathematical Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesMathematisches Forschungsinstitut OberwolfachUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueSun Yat-sen UniversityAgence Nationale de la RecherchePacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
KeywordsMathematicsFiberPure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We put forward a uniform narrative that weaves together several variants of Hrushovski– Kazhdan style integral, and describe how it can facilitate the understanding of the Denef–Loeser motivic Milnor fiber and closely related objects. Our study focuses on the so-called “nonarchimedean Milnor fiber” that was introduced by Hrushovski and Loeser, and our thesis is that it is a richer embodiment of the underlying philosophy of the Milnor construction. The said narrative is first developed in the more natural complex environment, and is then extended to the real one via descent. In the process of doing so, we are able to provide more illuminating new proofs, free of resolution of singularities, of a few pivotal results in the literature, both complex and real. To begin with, the real motivic zeta function is shown to be rational, which yields the real motivic Milnor fiber; this is an analogue of the Hrushovski–Loeser construction. Then, applying T -convex integration after descent, matching the Euler characteristics of the topological Milnor fiber and the motivic Milnor fiber becomes a matter of simple computation, which is not only free of resolution of singularities as in the Hrushovski–Loeser proof, but is also free of other sophisticated algebro-geometric machineries. Finally, we also establish, in a much more intuitive manner, a new Thom–Sebastiani formula, which can be specialized to the one given by Guibert–Loeser–Merle.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.274
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the European Mathematical SocietySame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207