Bibliographic record
Abstract
Propositions 4.2 and 4.3 of the author's article (Theory Appl.Categ.14 (2005), 451-479) are not correct.We show that their use can be avoided and all remaining results remain correct 1 .Propositions 4.2 and 4.3 of the author's [3] are not correct and I am grateful to J. F. Jardine for pointing it out.In fact, consider the diagram D sending the one morphism category to the point ∆ 0 in the homotopy category Ho(SSet) of simplicial sets.The standard weak colimit of D is the standard weak coequalizerBut P is weakly equivalent to the circle and thus it is not contractible.Hence the standard weak colimit of D is not weakly equivalent to the colimit of D.A fatal error is in the last line of part I of the proof of Proposition 4.2.We could neglect the identity morphisms in the construction of weak colimits via coproducts and weak coequalizers.It means that we take the coproduct e:d→d Dd indexed by all non-identity morphisms e of D. Then, taking for D the three-element chain and for D : D → SSet the constant diagram at ∆ 0 , the modified standard weak colimit of D is not contractible again.In fact, R. Jardine showed that for each small category
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".