MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414786423 · doi:10.4171/ecr/21/4

Exact structures for persistence modules

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414786423 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin Blanchette, Thomas Brüstle, Eric J. Hanson

Bibliographic record

VenueEMS series of congress reports · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsBishop's UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdjunctionMorphismDimension (graph theory)Algebra over a fieldRepresentation (politics)Closure (psychology)Projective planeProjective module

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss applications of exact structures and relative homological algebra to the study of invariants of multiparameter persistence modules. This paper is mostly expository, but does contain a pair of novel results. Over finite posets, classical arguments about the relative projective modules of an exact structure make use of Auslander–Reiten theory. One of our results establishes a new adjunction which allows us to “lift” these arguments to certain infinite posets over which Auslander–Reiten sequences do not always exist. We give several examples of this lifting, in particular highlighting the non-existence and existence of resolutions by upsets when working with finitely presentable representations of the plane and of the closure of the positive quadrant, respectively. We then restrict our attention to finite posets. In this setting, we discuss the relationship between the global dimension of an exact structure and the representation dimension of the incidence algebra of the poset. We conclude with our second novel contribution. This is an explicit description of the irreducible morphisms between relative projective modules for several exact structures which have appeared previously in the literature.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEMS series of congress reportsSame topicTopological and Geometric Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207