MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4377010135 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.09639

Ext groups in Homotopy Type Theory

2023· preprint· en· W4377010135 on OpenAlexfundno aff
J. Daniel Christensen, Jarl G. Taxerås Flaten

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsPure mathematicsGroup (periodic table)SheafInterpretation (philosophy)Abelian groupNilpotentHomotopyHomotopy categoryInjective functionResolution (logic)Algebra over a field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ext groups are fundamental homological invariants which have important applications in homotopy theory and algebra. In particular, they appear in the classical universal coefficient theorem, a key computational tool in homotopy theory. Motivated by the goal of extending such tools to synethetic homotopy theory, we develop the theory of Yoneda Ext groups [Yon54] over a ring in homotopy type theory (HoTT) and describe their interpretation into an $\infty$-topos. The Yoneda approach to Ext groups does not require projective or injective resolutions, which is a crucial in HoTT since we do not know that such resolutions exist. While it produces group objects that are a priori, we show that the $\mathrm{Ext}^1$ groups are equivalent to small groups, leaving open the question of whether the higher Ext groups are essentially small as well. We also show that the $\mathrm{Ext}^1$ groups take on the usual form as a product of cyclic groups whenever the input modules are finitely presented and the ring is a PID (in the constructive sense). When interpreted into an $\infty$-topos of sheaves on a 1-category, our Ext groups recover (and give a resolution-free approach to) sheaf Ext groups, which arise in algebraic geometry [Gro57]. (These are also called "local" Ext groups.) We may therefore interpret results about Ext from HoTT and apply them to sheaf Ext. To show this, we prove that injectivity of modules in HoTT interprets to internal injectivity in these models. It follows, for example, that sheaf Ext can be computed using resolutions which are projective or injective in the sense of HoTT, when they exist, and we give an example of this in the projective case. We also discuss the relation between internal $\mathbb{Z} G$-modules (for a $0$-truncated group object $G$) and abelian groups in the slice over $BG$, and study the interpretation of our Ext groups in both settings.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.105 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology→French-language works237,207→