MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393385892 · doi:10.1090/jag/827

All 81 crepant resolutions of a finite quotient singularity are hyperpolygon spaces

2024· article· lv· W4393385892 on OpenAlexafffund
Gwyn Bellamy, Alastair Craw, Steven Rayan, Travis Schedler, Hartmut Weiß

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Algebraic Geometry · 2024
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsMathematicsQuotientPure mathematicsAlgebra over a field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that the linear quotient singularity for the exceptional subgroup G G in S p ( 4 , C ) \mathrm {Sp}(4,\mathbb {C}) of order 32 is isomorphic to an affine quiver variety for a 5-pointed star-shaped quiver. This allows us to construct uniformly all 81 projective crepant resolutions of C 4 / G \mathbb {C}^4/G as hyperpolygon spaces by variation of GIT quotient, and we describe both the movable cone and the Namikawa Weyl group action via an explicit hyperplane arrangement. More generally, for the n n -pointed star shaped quiver, we describe completely the birational geometry for the corresponding hyperpolygon spaces in dimension 2 n − 6 2n-6 ; for example, we show that there are 1684 projective crepant resolutions when n = 6 n=6 . We also prove that the resulting affine cones are not quotient singularities for n ≥ 6 n \geq 6 .

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)0.002
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.292
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Algebraic GeometrySame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207