MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Categorical Foundations of Persistent Homology: Bridging Classical Topology and Topological Data Analysis with Applications

2025· article· W4416785446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jamal Odetallah, Wedad R. Alharbi, Salsabiela Rawashdeh, Ala Amourah, Tala Sasa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Analysis and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Petra
KeywordsCategorical variablePersistent homologyTopological data analysisAlgebraic topologyTopology (electrical circuits)Computational topologyCategory theorySheaf

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel categorical framework that unifies classical algebraic topology with modern topological data analysis through the lens of category theory. We develop the theory of persistence categories as a natural generalization of persistence modules, establishing functorial relationships between classical topological invariants and their persistent counterparts. Our approach reveals deep connections between sheaf cohomology, spectral sequences, and multi-parameter persistence, providing a rigorous mathematical foundation for understanding the stability and structure of topological features in data. We prove that persistent homology can be viewed as a particular instance of a more general categorical construction that encompasses both classical and computational topology. Furthermore, we establish new stability theorems for categorical persistence and demonstrate how classical results in algebraic topology can be lifted to the persistent setting through appropriate functorial constructions. We present practical applications in data science, computational biology, and machine learning, demonstrating the effectiveness of our theoretical framework through concrete implementations and computational experiments.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicTopological and Geometric Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207