MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6963714729 · doi:10.18910/92412

TORUS FIXED POINT SETS OF HESSENBERG SCHUBERT VARIETIES IN REGULAR SEMISIMPLE HESSENBERG VARIETIES

2023· article· en· W6963714729 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Science FoundationGovernment of CanadaNational Security AgencyLyda Hill FoundationMicrosoft Research
KeywordsWeyl groupSchubert varietyBruhat orderSchubert polynomialVariety (cybernetics)Schubert calculusType (biology)Partition (number theory)Fixed pointLemma (botany)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well-known that the T-fixed points of a Schubert variety in the flag variety GLn(C)/B can be characterized purely combinatorially in terms of Bruhat order on the symmetric group Sn. In a recent preprint, Cho, Hong, and Lee give a combinatorial description of the T-fixed points of Hessenberg analogues of Schubert varieties (which we call Hessenberg Schubert varieties) in a regular semisimple Hessenberg variety. This note gives an interpretation of their result in terms of Bruhat order by making use of a partition of the symmetric group defined using so-called subsets of Weyl type. The Appendix, written by Michael Zeng, proves a lemma concerning subsets of Weyl type which is required in our arguments.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→