MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403152442 · doi:10.1093/imrn/rnae216

Dirac Eigenvalue Optimisation and Harmonic Maps to Complex Projective Spaces

2024· article· en· W4403152442 on OpenAlexafffund
Mikhail Karpukhin, Antoine Métras, Iosif Polterovich

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mathematics Research Notices · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic and Geometric Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de MontréalNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsProjective testEigenvalues and eigenvectorsHarmonic mapHarmonicPure mathematicsDirac (video compression format)Projective spaceMathematical analysisAlgebra over a fieldQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Consider a Dirac operator on an oriented compact surface endowed with a Riemannian metric and spin structure. Provided the area and the conformal class are fixed, how small can the $k$-th positive Dirac eigenvalue be? This problem mirrors the maximization problem for the eigenvalues of the Laplacian, which is related to the study of harmonic maps into spheres. We uncover the connection between the critical metrics for Dirac eigenvalues and harmonic maps into complex projective spaces. Using this approach we show that for many conformal classes on a torus the first nonzero Dirac eigenvalue is minimised by the flat metric. We also present a new geometric proof of Bär’s theorem stating that the first nonzero Dirac eigenvalue on the sphere is minimised by the standard round metric.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.266
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mathematics Research NoticesSame topicAlgebraic and Geometric AnalysisFrench-language works237,207