MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367677360 · doi:10.1515/forum-2022-0324

On the number of rational points of certain algebraic varieties over finite fields

2023· article· en· W4367677360 on OpenAlexaff
Guangyan Zhu, Siao Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueForum Mathematicum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsExponentMathematicsAlgebraic numberAlgebra over a fieldMathematical analysisPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Let 𝔽 q {\mathbb{F}_{q}} be the finite field of odd characteristic p with q elements ( q = p n {q=p^{n}} , n ∈ ℕ {n\in\mathbb{N}} ) and let 𝔽 q * {\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}} represent the set of nonzero elements of 𝔽 q {\mathbb{F}_{q}} . By making use of the Smith normal form of exponent matrices, we obtain an explicit formula for the number of rational points on the variety defined by the following system of equations over 𝔽 q {\mathbb{F}_{q}} : { ∑ i = 1 r a i ( 1 ) ⁢ x 1 e i ⁢ 1 ( 1 ) ⁢ ⋯ ⁢ x n e i ⁢ n ( 1 ) = b 1 ,

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 venueForum MathematicumSame topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207