MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7094349798

Completely bounded representations of convolution algebras of locally compact quantum groups

2013· article· en· W7094349798 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBounded functionHomomorphismLocally compact spaceInvertible matrixCompact groupCompact quantum groupConvolution (computer science)Locally compact groupQuantumTensor product
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a locally compact quantum group G, we study the structure of completely bounded homomorphisms π:L1(G)→B(H), and the question of when they are similar to ∗-homomorphisms. By analogy with the cocommutative case (representations of the Fourier algebra A(G)), we are led to consider the associated map π∗:L1♯(G)→B(H) given by π∗(ω)=π(ω♯)∗. We show that the corepresentation Vπ of L∞(G) associated to π is invertible if and only if both π and π∗ are completely bounded. Moreover, we show that the co-efficient operators of such representations give rise to completely bounded multipliers of the dual convolution algebra $L^1(\\hat \\mathbb G)$. An application of these results is that any (co)isometric corepresentation is automatically unitary. An averaging argument then shows that when G is amenable, π is similar to a *-homomorphism if and only if π∗ is completely bounded. For compact Kac algebras, and for certain cases of A(G), we show that any completely bounded homomorphism π is similar to a *-homomorphism, without further assumption on π∗. Using free product techniques, we construct new examples of compact quantum groups G such that L1(G) admits bounded, but not completely bounded, representations.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWhite Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)Same topicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207