MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402645746 · doi:10.4171/jca/101

On the interaction of the Coxeter transformation and the rowmotion bijection

2024· article· en· W4402645746 on OpenAlexafffund
René Marczinzik, Hugh Thomas, Emine Yıldırım

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Algebra · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilBanff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and DiscoveryJohns Hopkins UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBijectionCoxeter groupTransformation (genetics)MathematicsCombinatoricsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let P be a finite poset and L the associated distributive lattice of order ideals of P . Let \rho denote the rowmotion bijection of the order ideals of P viewed as a permutation matrix and C the Coxeter matrix for the incidence algebra kL of L . Then, we show the identity (\rho^{-1}C)^{2}=\mathrm{id} , as was originally conjectured by Sam Hopkins. Recently, it was noted that the rowmotion bijection is a special case of the much more general grade bijection R that exists for any Auslander regular algebra. This motivates to study the interaction of the grade bijection and the Coxeter matrix for general Auslander regular algebras. For the class of higher Auslander algebras coming from n -representation finite algebras, we show that (R^{-1}C)^{2}=\mathrm{id} if n is even and (R^{-1}C+\mathrm{id})^{2}=0 when n is odd.

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)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial AlgebraSame topicAdvanced Combinatorial MathematicsFrench-language works237,207