MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W619284308 · doi:10.4171/dm/569

Potentially Crystalline Lifts of Certain Prescribed Types

2017· article· en· W619284308 on OpenAlexafffund
Toby Gee, Florian Herzig, Tong Liu, David Savitt

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumenta Mathematica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Algebra and Geometry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLeverhulme TrustNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove several results concerning the existence of potentially crystalline lifts of prescribed Hodge-Tate weights and inertial types of a given representation \overline{r}:G_{K}\to\mathrm{GL}_{n}(\overline{\Bbb{F}}_p) , where K/\Bbb Q_p is a finite extension. Some of these results are proved by purely local methods, and are expected to be useful in the application of automorphy lifting theorems. The proofs of the other results are global, making use of automorphy lifting theorems.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumenta MathematicaSame topicAdvanced Algebra and GeometryFrench-language works237,207