MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383033361 · doi:10.26493/2590-9770.1613.15d

Automorphisms of the canonical double cover of a toroidal grid

2023· article· en· W4383033361 on OpenAlexaff
Dave Witte Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Art of Discrete and Applied Mathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagonalConjectureMathematicsTorusAutomorphismCombinatoricsBipartite graphToroidEmbeddingCartesian productPure mathematicsGeometryPhysicsQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cartesian product of two cycles (of length m and length n) has a natural embedding on the torus, such that each face of the embedding is a 4-cycle. The toroidal grid Qd(m,n,r) is a generalization of this in which there is a shift by r when traversing the meridian of length m. In 2008, Steve Wilson found two interesting infinite families of (nonbipartite) toroidal grids that are unstable. (By definition, this means that the canonical bipartite double cover of the grid has more than twice as many automorphisms as the grid has.) It is easy to see that bipartite grids are also unstable, because the canonical double cover is disconnected. Furthermore, there are degenerate cases in which there exist two different vertices that have the same neighbours. This paper proves Wilson's conjecture that Qd(m,n,r) is stable for all other values of the parameters. In addition, we prove an analogous conjecture of Wilson for the triangular grids Tr(m,n,r) that are obtained by adding a diagonal to each face of Qd(m,n,r) (with all of the added diagonals parallel to each other).

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Art of Discrete and Applied MathematicsSame topicAdvanced Differential Equations and Dynamical SystemsFrench-language works237,207