MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6948107546 · doi:10.4230/lipics.ccc.2023.20

Radical Sylvester-Gallai Theorem for Tuples of Quadratics

2023· article· en· W6948107546 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries and Information Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodimensionIntersection theoremStructured program theoremGeneralizationDimension (graph theory)Polynomial ringQuadratic equationRepresentation theoremTuple

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove a higher codimensional radical Sylvester-Gallai type theorem for quadratic polynomials, simultaneously generalizing [Hansen, 1965; Shpilka, 2020]. Hansen’s theorem is a high-dimensional version of the classical Sylvester-Gallai theorem in which the incidence condition is given by high-dimensional flats instead of lines. We generalize Hansen’s theorem to the setting of quadratic forms in a polynomial ring, where the incidence condition is given by radical membership in a high-codimensional ideal. Our main theorem is also a generalization of the quadratic Sylvester-Gallai Theorem of [Shpilka, 2020]. Our work is the first to prove a radical Sylvester-Gallai type theorem for arbitrary codimension k ≥ 2, whereas previous works [Shpilka, 2020; Shir Peleg and Amir Shpilka, 2020; Shir Peleg and Amir Shpilka, 2021; Garg et al., 2022] considered the case of codimension 2 ideals. Our techniques combine algebraic geometric and combinatorial arguments. A key ingredient is a structural result for ideals generated by a constant number of quadratics, showing that such ideals must be radical whenever the quadratic forms are far apart. Using the wide algebras defined in [Garg et al., 2022], combined with results about integral ring extensions and dimension theory, we develop new techniques for studying such ideals generated by quadratic forms. One advantage of our approach is that it does not need the finer classification theorems for codimension 2 complete intersection of quadratics proved in [Shpilka, 2020; Garg et al., 2022].

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.255
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicLibraries and Information ServicesFrench-language works237,207