Homaloidal Polynomials and Gaussian Models of Maximum Likelihood Degree One
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the Gaussian statistical models whose log-likelihood function has a unique complex critical point, i.e., has maximum likelihood degree one. We exploit the connection developed by Améndola et. al. between the models having maximum likelihood degree one and homaloidal polynomials. We study the spanning tree generating function of a graph and show this polynomial is homaloidal when the graph is chordal. When the graph is a cycle on $n$ vertices, $n \geq 4$, we prove the polynomial is not homaloidal, and show that the maximum likelihood degree of the resulting model is the $n$th Eulerian number. These results support our conjecture that the spanning tree generating function is a homaloidal polynomial if and only if the graph is chordal. We also provide an algebraic formulation for the defining equations of these models. Using existing results, we provide a computational study on constructing new families of homaloidal polynomials. In the end, we analyze the symmetric determinantal representation of such polynomials and provide an upper bound on the size of the matrices involved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".