MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412980563 · doi:10.1016/j.bulsci.2025.103707

A closer look at Witt rings for forms of higher degree

2025· article· en· W4412980563 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Susanne Pumpluen

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin des Sciences Mathématiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsDegree (music)MathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Witt rings for nondegenerate forms φ of degree d over a field of characteristic 0 or greater than d were defined by Harrison and Pareigis in 1988. We revisit and discuss their definition in light of recent developments. We classify the H -spaces employed in their definition, demonstrate the restrictions on the structure imposed on Witt rings due to a Krull-Schmidt Theorem for forms of higher degree, and propose to define Witt rings of diagonal forms of degree d . We investigate some special cases; and define two new types of Witt rings for nondegenerate forms φ of degree d .

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.346
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin des Sciences MathématiquesSame topicAlgebraic structures and combinatorial modelsFrench-language works237,207