Characteristic numbers and group actions

1991 ◽  
pp. 325-336
Author(s):  
Sung Sook Kim
Keyword(s):  
Group Actions ◽  
Characteristic Numbers

Generating pairs and group actions

2014 ◽  
Vol 218 (5) ◽  
pp. 777-783
Author(s):  
Darryl McCullough
Keyword(s):  
Group Actions

scholarly journals The close relation between border and Pommaret marked bases

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Bertone ◽  
Francesca Cioffi
Keyword(s):  
Finite Order ◽  
Polynomial Ring ◽  
Group Actions ◽  
Close Relation ◽  
Open Covering ◽  
Order Ideal ◽  
Lower Dimension ◽  
Hilbert Schemes ◽  
Affine Spaces ◽  
The Ideal

AbstractGiven a finite order ideal $${\mathcal {O}}$$ O in the polynomial ring $$K[x_1,\ldots , x_n]$$ K [ x 1 , … , x n ] over a field K, let $$\partial {\mathcal {O}}$$ ∂ O be the border of $${\mathcal {O}}$$ O and $${\mathcal {P}}_{\mathcal {O}}$$ P O the Pommaret basis of the ideal generated by the terms outside $${\mathcal {O}}$$ O . In the framework of reduction structures introduced by Ceria, Mora, Roggero in 2019, we investigate relations among $$\partial {\mathcal {O}}$$ ∂ O -marked sets (resp. bases) and $${\mathcal {P}}_{\mathcal {O}}$$ P O -marked sets (resp. bases). We prove that a $$\partial {\mathcal {O}}$$ ∂ O -marked set B is a marked basis if and only if the $${\mathcal {P}}_{\mathcal {O}}$$ P O -marked set P contained in B is a marked basis and generates the same ideal as B. Using a functorial description of these marked bases, as a byproduct we obtain that the affine schemes respectively parameterizing $$\partial {\mathcal {O}}$$ ∂ O -marked bases and $${\mathcal {P}}_{\mathcal {O}}$$ P O -marked bases are isomorphic. We are able to describe this isomorphism as a projection that can be explicitly constructed without the use of Gröbner elimination techniques. In particular, we obtain a straightforward embedding of border schemes in affine spaces of lower dimension. Furthermore, we observe that Pommaret marked schemes give an open covering of Hilbert schemes parameterizing 0-dimensional schemes without any group actions. Several examples are given throughout the paper.

scholarly journals Schottky groups acting on homogeneous rational manifolds

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (753) ◽  
pp. 23-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Miebach ◽  
Karl Oeljeklaus
Keyword(s):  
Deformation Theory ◽  
Group Actions ◽  
Picard Group ◽  
Schottky Group ◽  
Fundamental Groups ◽  
Complex Manifolds ◽  
Schottky Groups ◽  
Algebraic Dimension ◽  
Geometric Invariants ◽  
Compact Complex Manifolds

AbstractWe systematically study Schottky group actions on homogeneous rational manifolds and find two new families besides those given by Nori’s well-known construction. This yields new examples of non-Kähler compact complex manifolds having free fundamental groups. We then investigate their analytic and geometric invariants such as the Kodaira and algebraic dimension, the Picard group and the deformation theory, thus extending results due to Lárusson and to Seade and Verjovsky. As a byproduct, we see that the Schottky construction allows to recover examples of equivariant compactifications of {{\rm{SL}}(2,\mathbb{C})/\Gamma} for Γ a discrete free loxodromic subgroup of {{\rm{SL}}(2,\mathbb{C})}, previously obtained by A. Guillot.

Characteristic numbers ofG-manifolds. I

1971 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tammo Tom Dieck
Keyword(s):  
Characteristic Numbers

AN INTENSIONAL LEIBNIZ SEMANTICS FOR ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
KLAUS GLASHOFF
Keyword(s):  
Natural Deduction ◽  
Predicate Logic ◽  
Formal System ◽  
Aristotelian Logic ◽  
Categorical Logic ◽  
Characteristic Numbers ◽  
Formal Syntax ◽  
Philosophical Standpoint ◽  
Classical Philosophy

Since Frege’s predicate logical transcription of Aristotelian categorical logic, the standard semantics of Aristotelian logic considers terms as standing for sets of individuals. From a philosophical standpoint, this extensional model poses problems: There exist serious doubts that Aristotle’s terms were meant to refer always to sets, that is, entities composed of individuals. Classical philosophy up to Leibniz and Kant had a different view on this question—they looked at terms as standing for concepts (“Begriffe”). In 1972, Corcoran presented a formal system for Aristotelian logic containing a calculus of natural deduction, while, with respect to semantics, he still made use of an extensional interpretation. In this paper we deal with a simple intensional semantics for Corcoran’s syntax—intensional in the sense that no individuals are needed for the construction of a complete Tarski model of Aristotelian syntax. Instead, we view concepts as containing or excluding other, “higher” concepts—corresponding to the idea which Leibniz used in the construction of his characteristic numbers. Thus, this paper is an addendum to Corcoran’s work, furnishing his formal syntax with an adequate semantics which is free from presuppositions which have entered into modern interpretations of Aristotle’s theory via predicate logic.

scholarly journals Lifting group actions and nonnegative curvature

2011 ◽  
Vol 363 (06) ◽  
pp. 2865-2865 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karsten Grove ◽  
Wolfgang Ziller
Keyword(s):  
Group Actions ◽  
Nonnegative Curvature
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document