MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313015784 · doi:10.5486/pmd.2009.4452

Jordan loop rings

2009· article· en· W4313015784 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bradley C. Dart, Edgar G. Goodaire

Bibliographic record

VenuePublicationes Mathematicae Debrecen · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topics in Algebra
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsLoop (graph theory)Pure mathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A commutative loop or ring is said to be Jordan if it satisfies the identity (x 2 y)x = x 2 (yx).We show that the loop ring of a Jordan loop L is Jordan and not associative only if the characteristic of the coefficient ring is even and call such a loop ring Jordan (RJ, for short).While Jordan loops are in general not power associative, RJ loops are.We give various constructions of finite RJ loops and conjecture that these exist only when they have order divisible by four.We also conjecture that RJ loops are precisely those commutative loops in which squares are in the left nucleus.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublicationes Mathematicae DebrecenSame topicAdvanced Topics in AlgebraFrench-language works237,207