MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393950498 · doi:10.1090/memo/1476

Higher Airy Structures, 𝒲 Algebras and Topological Recursion

2024· article· en· W4393950498 on OpenAlexafffund
Gaëtan Borot, Vincent Bouchard, Nitin Kumar Chidambaram, Thomas Creutzig, Dmitry Noshchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueMemoirs of the American Mathematical Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMax-Planck-GesellschaftFundacja na rzecz Nauki PolskiejEuropean Commission
KeywordsRecursion (computer science)MathematicsPure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldTopology (electrical circuits)CombinatoricsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define higher quantum Airy structures as generalizations of the Kontsevich–Soibelman quantum Airy structures by allowing differential operators of arbitrary order (instead of only quadratic). We construct many classes of examples of higher quantum Airy structures as modules of W ( g ) \mathcal {W}(\mathfrak {g}) algebras at self-dual level, with g = g l N + 1 \mathfrak {g}= \mathfrak {gl}_{N+1} , s o 2 N \mathfrak {so}_{2 N } or e N \mathfrak {e}_N . We discuss their enumerative geometric meaning in the context of (open and closed) intersection theory of the moduli space of curves and its variants. Some of these W \mathcal {W} constraints have already appeared in the literature, but we find many new ones. For g l N + 1 \mathfrak {gl}_{N+1} our result hinges on the description of previously unnoticed Lie subalgebras of the algebra of modes. As a consequence, we obtain a simple characterization of the spectral curves (with arbitrary ramification) for which the Bouchard–Eynard topological recursion gives symmetric ω g , n \omega _{g,n} s and is thus well defined. For all such cases, we show that the topological recursion is equivalent to W ( g l ) \mathcal {W}(\mathfrak {gl}) constraints realized as higher quantum Airy structures, and obtain a Givental-like decomposition for the corresponding partition functions.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemoirs of the American Mathematical SocietySame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207