Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A Tits polygon is a bipartite graph in which the neighborhood of every vertex is endowed with an “opposition relation” satisfying certain properties. Moufang polygons are precisely the Tits polygons in which these opposition relations are all trivial. There is a standard construction that produces a Tits polygon whose opposition relations are not all trivial from an arbitrary pair $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5},T)$ , where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}$ is a building of type $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}$ , $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}$ is a spherical, irreducible Coxeter diagram of rank at least $3$ , and $T$ is a Tits index of absolute type $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6F1}$ and relative rank $2$ . A Tits polygon is called $k$ -plump if its opposition relations satisfy a mild condition that is satisfied by all Tits triangles coming from a pair $(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5},T)$ such that every panel of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E5}$ has at least $k+1$ chambers. We show that a $5$ -plump Tits triangle is parametrized and uniquely determined by a ring $R$ that is alternative and of stable rank $2$ . We use the connection between Tits triangles and the theory of Veldkamp planes as developed by Veldkamp and Faulkner to show existence.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.023 | 0.059 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".