MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389155988 · doi:10.1112/topo.70027

The Dehn twist action for quantum representations of mapping class groups

2025· article· en· W4389155988 on OpenAlexafffund
Lukas Müller, Lukas Woike

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Topology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesAgence Nationale de la RechercheGovernment of Canada
KeywordsTwistAction (physics)Class (philosophy)Mapping class groupMathematicsQuantumPure mathematicsCombinatoricsGroup (periodic table)Algebra over a fieldPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeometryQuantum mechanicsSurface (topology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We calculate the Dehn twist action on the spaces of conformal blocks of a not necessarily semisimple modular category. In particular, we give the order of the Dehn twists under the mapping class group representations of closed surfaces. For Dehn twists about non‐separating simple closed curves, we prove that this order is the order of the ribbon twist, thereby generalizing a result that De Renzi–Gainutdinov–Geer–Patureau–Mirand–Runkel obtained for the small quantum group. In the separating case, we express the order using the order of the ribbon twist on monoidal powers of the canonical end. As an application, we prove that the Johnson kernels of the mapping class groups act trivially if and only if for the canonical end the ribbon twist and double braiding with itself are trivial. We give a similar result for the visibility of the Torelli groups.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of TopologySame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207