MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294805317 · doi:10.5206/mt.v2i1.14425

Maple-based introductory visual guide to Gröbner bases

2022· article· en· W4294805317 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaple Transactions · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeal (ethics)Interpretation (philosophy)Computer scienceAlgebra over a fieldSymbolic computationAlgebraic numberAlgebraic geometryMathematicsPure mathematicsProgramming languageEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1975 the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (the main Spanish institution for scientific research) published the monograph [14] by the second author (by the way, father and Ph.D. advisor of the first author). Its title could be translated as "Geometric Interpretation of Ideal Theory" (nowadays Ideal Theory is not normally used, in favour of Commutative Algebra). It somehow illustrated the geometric ideas underlying the basics of the classic books of the period (like [2, 11, 16]) and was a success: although written in Spanish, the edition was sold out.Of course there are much more modern books on ideals and varieties than [2, 11, 16], such as the famous [7] or [8], that illustrate the theory with images. Moreover, there are introductory works to Gröbner bases such as [3, 9, 12, 13, 15], as well as books on the topic like [1], and articles about applications, like the early [4]. Even a summary in English of the original Ph.D. Thesis by Bruno Buchberger is available [5].
 Nevertheless, we believe that there is a place for a visual guide to Gröbner bases, as there was a place for [14].
 For instance, statistical packages are probably the pieces of mathematical software best known by non-mathematicians, and they are frequently used as black boxes by users with a slight knowledge of the theory behind. Meanwhile, Gröbner bases, the most common exact method behind non-linear polynomial systems (algebraic systems) solving, although incorporated to all computer algebra systems, are only known by a relatively small ratio of the members of the scientific community, most of them mathematicians. This article presents in an intuitive and visual way an illustrative selection of ideals and their Gröbner bases, together with the plots of the (real part) of their corresponding algebraic varieties, computed and plotted with Maple [6, 10]. A minimum amount of theoretical details is given. We believe that exact algebraic systems solving could also be used as a black box by non-mathematicians just understanding the basic ideas underlying commutative algebra and computer algebra.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.240 · 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