MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320036520 · doi:10.1007/s00220-023-04656-2

A Gromov–Witten Theory for Simple Normal-Crossing Pairs Without Log Geometry

2023· article· en· W4320036520 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hsian‐Hua Tseng, Fenglong You

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Mathematical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversitetet i OsloCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaSimons Foundation
KeywordsQuantum cohomologyMirror symmetryMathematicsCohomologyConjecturePure mathematicsZero (linguistics)Formalism (music)Simple (philosophy)Quantum field theoryMotivic cohomologyAlgebra over a fieldDe Rham cohomologyEquivariant cohomologyMathematical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define a new Gromov-Witten theory relative to simple normal crossing divisors as a limit of Gromov-Witten theory of multi-root stacks. Several structural properties are proved including relative quantum cohomology, Givental formalism, Virasoro constraints (genus zero) and a partial cohomological field theory. Furthermore, we use the degree zero part of the relative quantum cohomology to provide an alternative mirror construction of Gross and Siebert (Intrinsic mirror symmetry, arXiv:1909.07649) and to prove the Frobenius structure conjecture of Gross et al. (Publ Math Inst Hautes Études Sci 122:65-168, 2015) in our setting.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Mathematical PhysicsSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207