MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387641893 · doi:10.1142/s1793042124500246

A lower bound on the proportion of modular elliptic curves over Galois CM fields

2023· article· en· W4387641893 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Zachary Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Number Theory · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsGalois moduleElliptic curveUpper and lower boundsPure mathematicsQuadratic equationAlgebraic number fieldField (mathematics)CombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We calculate an explicit lower bound on the proportion of elliptic curves that are modular over any Galois CM field not containing [Formula: see text]. Applied to imaginary quadratic fields, this proportion is at least [Formula: see text]. Applied to cyclotomic fields [Formula: see text] with [Formula: see text], this proportion is at least [Formula: see text] with only finitely many exceptions of [Formula: see text], for any choice of [Formula: see text].

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venueInternational Journal of Number TheorySame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207