Lazy tournaments and multidegrees of a projective embedding of \(\overline{M}_{0,n}\)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the (iterated) Kapranov embedding \(\Omega_n:\overline{M}_{0,n+3} \hookrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1 \times \cdots \times \mathbb{P}^n\), where \(\overline{M}_{0,n+3}\) is the moduli space of stable genus \(0\) curves with \(n+3\) marked points. In 2020, Gillespie, Cavalieri, and Monin gave a recursion satisfied by the multidegrees of \(\Omega_n\) and showed, using two combinatorial insertion algorithms on certain parking functions, that the total degree of \(\Omega_n\) is \((2n-1)!!=(2n-1)\cdot (2n-3) \cdots 5 \cdot 3 \cdot 1\). In this paper, we give a new proof of this fact by enumerating each multidegree by a set of boundary points of \(\overline{M}_{0,n+3}\), via an algorithm on trivalent trees that we call a lazy tournament. The advantages of this new interpretation are twofold: first, these sets project to one another under the forgetting maps used to derive the multidegree recursion. Second, these sets naturally partition the complete set of boundary points on \(\overline{M}_{0,n+2}\), of which there are \((2n-1)!!\), giving an immediate proof of the total degree formula.Mathematics Subject Classifications: 05E14, 14N10, 05C05, 14H10, 05A19, 05C85Keywords: Moduli spaces of curves, projective embeddings, multidegrees, trivalent trees
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it