Pith. Sign in

RECORD

A young person's guide to mixed Hodge modules

Algebraic Geometry · Submitted 2 May 2016

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We give a rather informal introduction to the theory of mixed Hodge modules for young mathematicians.

how it is stated · asserted 0.95 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1605.00435 (version 5)
Pith IDEQO3KR4W, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationMorihiko Saito. "A young person's guide to mixed Hodge modules." arXiv:1605.00435 (2016). https://pith.science/paper/EQO3KR4W
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 1,570 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.39 · human participants 0.03 · controlled comparison 0.01 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.02 · compares with prior results 0.02 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v5. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We give a rather informal introduction to the theory of mixed Hodge modules for young mathematicians.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We give a rather informal introduction to the theory of mixed Hodge modules for young mathematicians. contribution 1.00 0.84 0.17 asserted 0.95

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: review 0.97 · evidence from argument 0.70.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v5
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We give a rather informal introduction to the theory of mixed Hodge modules for young mathematicians.

Human review
How the literature uses it

13 arXiv papers cite this in 19 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 12 sentences without a confident label

Cites it as background 7 papers

What it cites · 7 sentences without a confident label

Uses the method or tool of 1 paper
  • Theorem (2.4) then follows from the theory of bi-graded Hodge structures of Lefschetz type as in the proof of [ref] (see also [ref] where a slightly better explanation is given).

    Monodromy Filtration and Positivity · Introduction · 0.85

Cites as background 9 papers

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.