Women in topology : collaborations in homotopy theory : WIT: Women in Topology Workshop, August 18-23, 2013, Banff International Research Station, Banff, Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Representations of derived $A$-infinity algebras by C. I. Aponte Roman, M. Livernet, M. Robertson, S. Whitehouse, and S. Ziegenhagen Unbased calculus for functors to chain complexes by M. Basterra, K. Bauer, A. Beaudry, R. Eldred, B. Johnson, M. Merling, and S. Yeakel Left-induced model structures and diagram categories by M. Bayeh, K. Hess, V. Karpova, M. Kedziorek, E. Riehl, and B. Shipley Fixed points of $p$-toral groups acting on partition complexes by J. E. Bergner, R. Joachimi, K. Lesh, V. Stojanoska, and K. Wickelgren On the higher topological Hochschild homology of $\mathbb{F}_p$ and commutative $\mathbb{F}_p$-group algebras by I. Bobkova, A. Lindenstrauss, K. Poirier, B. Richter, and I. Zakharevich A model structure on $G\mathcal{C}\mathit{at}$ by A. M. Bohmann, K. Mazur, A. M. Osorno, V. Ozornova, K. Ponto, and C. Yarnall Orbispaces and their mapping spaces via groupoids: A categorical approach by V. Coufal, D. Pronk, C. Rovi, L. Scull, and C. Thatcher
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".