MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413965877 · doi:10.70930/tac/xrn8dflj

Hopf Monads on Biproducts

2023· article· en· W4413965877 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masahito Hasegawa, Jean-Simon Pacaud Lemay

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and applications of categories · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Topics in Algebra
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Hopf monad, in the sense of Bruguires, Lack, and Virelizier, is a special kind of monad that can be defined for any monoidal category.In this note, we study Hopf monads in the case of a category with finite biproducts, seen as a symmetric monoidal category.We show that for biproducts, a Hopf monad is precisely characterized as a monad equipped with an extra natural transformation satisfying three axioms, which we call a fusion invertor.We will also consider three special cases: representable Hopf monads, idempotent Hopf monads, and when the category also has negatives.In these cases, the fusion invertor will always be of a specific form that can be defined for any monad.Thus in these cases, checking that a monad is a Hopf monad is reduced to checking one identity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory and applications of categoriesSame topicAdvanced Topics in AlgebraFrench-language works237,207