MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2543706324 · doi:10.19086/da.3118

Rank bounds for design matrices with block entries and geometric applications

2018· preprint· en· W2543706324 sur OpenAlexafffund
Zeev Dvir, Ankit Garg, Rafael Oliveira, József Solymosi

Notice bibliographique

RevueDiscrete Analysis · 2018
Typepreprint
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
Mots-clésMathematicsCollinearityCombinatoricsLinear subspaceRank (graph theory)Upper and lower boundsMatrix (chemical analysis)Scalar (mathematics)ScalingDiscrete mathematicsPure mathematicsGeometry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Rank bounds for design matrices with block entries and geometric applications, Discrete Analysis 2018:5, 24 pp. It is not hard to prove, when the statement is suitably formulated, that if $A$ is a random matrix, then it is not possible to reduce the rank of $A$ by changing only a few entries. However, it is remarkably hard to find an explicit example of such a matrix. It turns out that explicit examples would have major applications in theoretical computer science, and therefore the matrix-rigidity problem is a central question in the area. In order to make progress on this problem, one can ask a more basic question: are there any combinatorial conditions on a matrix that guarantee that it has a high rank? An interesting condition has recently been identified that does not solve the matrix-rigidity problem but that does have several applications, in particular to combinatorial geometry. Roughly speaking, the condition is that there should not be many non-zero entries in any row or too few non-zero entries in any column, and for any two rows the number of columns for which the entries in both rows are non-zero is small. Such matrices are known as _design matrices_, since the conditions resemble those for a design, though they are significantly looser. The proof that such matrices have high rank uses a beautiful technique called _matrix scaling_. The rough idea is to multiply rows and columns by non-zero scalars until the entries are of broadly the same magnitude, and then to show that the matrix $A^*A$ is dominated by its diagonal. From this it follows fairly easily that $A^*A$ has high rank, and therefore that $A$ does as well. The argument can be found in [a paper of Barak, Dvir, Wigderson and Yehudayoff](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.4375.pdf) that this paper generalizes. Such rank bounds are useful, because there are several problems in combinatorial geometry that lead naturally to design matrices. For example, the Sylvester-Gallai theorem and its generalizations concern families of points and collinearity relations between them. If the points are $v_1,\dots,v_n$, then one can write them as column vectors and put them together to form a matrix $M$. Three of the points will be collinear if there is a linear dependence amongst the columns of this matrix with three non-zero coefficients, or equivalently a vector $w$ with three non-zero entries such that $Mw=0$. Under suitable hypotheses, one can use such vectors $w$ to create a design matrix and apply rank bounds on the design matrix to deduce combinatorial consequences about the set of points $v_1,\dots,v_n$. The generalization in this paper concerns design matrices whose entries are themselves matrices, or "blocks". Rank bounds are proved for such matrices, which lead to new applications in combinatorial geometry. One of these applications is to the following question. Let $T$ be a set of triples of elements of $\{1,2,\dots,n\}$ and let $V(T)$ be the variety of all sequences $(v_1,\dots,v_n)$ of points in $\mathbb C^d$ such that for every triple $\{i,j,k\}\in T$ the three points $v_i, v_j$ and $v_k$ are collinear. Given a (non-singular) sequence $V\in V(T)$, how many degrees of freedom does it have? A trivial lower bound is 8, resulting from the fact that projective transformations preserve collinearity. The authors prove a general result that has as a consequence that if every pair $\{i,j\}$ belongs to exactly one triple in $T$ and no line contains more than half the points of $V$, then the number of degrees of freedom of $V$ is at most 15. A more precise statement, as well as other interesting applications, can be found in the paper.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,019
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,062

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,029
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,004
Communication savante0,0030,006
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0190,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,270
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDiscrete AnalysisMême sujetComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationTravaux en français237 207