MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405340450 · doi:10.4153/s0008414x24000841

Simultaneously preperiodic points for a family of polynomials in positive characteristic

2024· article· en· W4405340450 on OpenAlexaff
Dragos Ghioca

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Mathematics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLambdaMathematicsParameterized complexityCombinatoricsAction (physics)PhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the goundbreaking paper [BD11] (which opened a wide avenue of research regarding unlikely intersections in arithmetic dynamics), Baker and DeMarco prove that for the family of polynomials $f_\lambda (x):=x^d+\lambda $ (parameterized by $\lambda \in \mathbb {C}$ ), given two starting points a and b in $\mathbb {C}$ , if there exist infinitely many $\lambda \in \mathbb {C}$ such that both a and b are preperiodic under the action of $f_\lambda $ , then $a^d=b^d$ . In this paper, we study the same question, this time working in a field of characteristic $p>0$ . The answer in positive characteristic is more nuanced, as there are three distinct cases: (i) both starting points a and b live in ${\overline {\mathbb F}_p}$ ; (ii) d is a power of p ; and (iii) not both a and b live in ${\overline {\mathbb F}_p}$ , while d is not a power of p . Only in case (iii), one derives the same conclusion as in characteristic $0$ (i.e., that $a^d=b^d$ ). In case (i), one has that for each $\lambda \in {\overline {\mathbb F}_p}$ , both a and b are preperiodic under the action of $f_\lambda $ , while in case (ii), one obtains that also whenever $a-b\in {\overline {\mathbb F}_p}$ , then for each parameter $\lambda $ , we have that a is preperiodic under the action of $f_\lambda $ if and only if b is preperiodic under the action of $f_\lambda $ .

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MathematicsSame topicAlgebraic Geometry and Number TheoryFrench-language works237,207