MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299620407

Quivers and the Euclidean algebra (Extended abstract)

2015· article· en· W4299620407 on OpenAlexaff
Alistair Savage

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgebra over a fieldEuclidean geometryEuclidean distanceComputer scienceMatrix algebraMathematicsPure mathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

representations of the preprojective algebra of the quiver of type A∞. Furthermore, we consider the moduli space of E(2)-modules along with a set of generators. We show that these moduli spaces are quiver varieties of the type considered by Nakajima. These identifications allow us to draw on known results about preprojective algebras and quiver varieties to prove various statements about representations of E(2). In particular, we show that E(2) has wild representation type but that if we impose certain combinatorial restrictions on the weight decompositions of a representation, we obtain only a finite number of indecomposable representations. Résumé. Nous montrons que la catégorie des représentations du groupe d’Euclide E(2) est équivalente a ̀ la catégorie des représentations de l’algèbre préprojective de type A∞. De plus, nous considérons l’espace classifiant de modules de E(2) avec un ensemble de générateurs. Nous montrons que ces espaces sont de variétés de carquois de Nakajima. Cette identification nous permet d’utiliser des résultats des algèbres préprojectives et des variétés de carquois pour prouver des affirmations sur des représentations deE(2). En particulier, nous montrons que le type de répresentations

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 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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207