Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am reading the paper Dual-to-Kernel Learning with Ideals. Here is part of it:

enter image description here

The definition/motivation of genericity in Wikipedia are

A generic point of the topological space $X$ is a point $P$ whose closure is all of $X$, that is, a point that is dense in $X$. The terminology arises from the case of the Zariski topology of algebraic varieties. For example having a generic point is a criterion to be an irreducible set.

I cannot see why this gives the linear independence in Theorem 1 immediately. Any hints? Thanks.

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

This isn't the meaning of "generic" you're looking for, although there's a historical relationship. If you try to think of your $y_i$ as generic points, or as constituting a generic point, you run into immediate problems since $\mathbb{K}^n$ will not have a generic point under any common topology (points are closed in all important examples.)

The "generic" here means "in general position," i.e. the $y_1...y_m$ aren't supposed to lie on the zero set of any polynomial of degree less than $m-1$. (It's best to think of this for $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{C}$ and $n=1$.) The claim then is just that being linearly dependent under $k_*$ would give such a polynomial relation.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.