MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386973034 · doi:10.3934/jmd.2023019

Circle homeomorphisms with breaks with no <inline-formula><tex-math id="M1">$\boldsymbol{C^{2-\nu}}$</tex-math></inline-formula> conjugacy

2023· article· en· W4386973034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Dynamics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsConjugacy classRotation numberGravitational singularityDiophantine equationTopological conjugacyRigidity (electromagnetism)Pure mathematicsFixed pointRotation (mathematics)CombinatoricsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rigidity theory for circle homeomorphisms with breaks has been studied intensively in the last 20 years. It was proved [15, 21, 17, 19] that under mild conditions of the Diophantine type on the rotation number any two $C^{2+\alpha}$ smooth circle homeomorphisms with a break point are $C^1$ smoothly conjugate to each other, provided that they have the same rotation number and the same size of the break. In this paper we prove that the conjugacy may not be $C^{2-\nu}$ even if the maps are analytic outside of the break points. This result shows that the rigidity theory for maps with singularities is very different from the linearizable case of circle diffeomorphisms where conjugacy is arbitrarily smooth, or even analytic, for sufficiently smooth diffeomorphisms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · 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