Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of powers of ideals in dimension two

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Alessandro De Stefani, Shreedevi K. Masuti, Maria Evelina Rossi, Jugal K. Verma

Commutative Algebra · Submitted 10 Dec 2024

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

The authors' main claim In dimension two, we provide answers to some problems raised by Smirnov, and give a criterion to answer one of his questions in terms of a "Ratliff-Rush version" of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2412.07546 (version 2)
Pith IDWJLQ6TVM, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAlessandro De Stefani, Jugal K. Verma, Maria Evelina Rossi, Shreedevi K. Masuti. "Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of powers of ideals in dimension two." arXiv:2412.07546 (2024). https://pith.science/paper/WJLQ6TVM
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, 2,297 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.28 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.06 · compares with prior results 0.27 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We study the behavior of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of powers of an ideal in a local ring. In dimension two, we provide answers to some problems raised by Smirnov, and give a criterion to answer one of his questions in terms of a "Ratliff-Rush version" of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity.

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 study the behavior of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of powers of an ideal in a local ring. contribution 0.86 0.87 0.08 asserted 0.75
s1 In dimension two, we provide answers to some problems raised by Smirnov, and give a criterion to answer one of his questions in terms of a "Ratliff-Rush version" of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity. contribution 0.82 0.95 0.65 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
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 study the behavior of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of powers of an ideal in a local ring. In dimension two, we provide answers to some problems raised by Smirnov, and give a criterion to answer one of his questions in terms of a "Ratliff-Rush version" of the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

How the literature uses it

What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites

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

Discussion

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