MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W120212917 · doi:10.46298/dmtcs.308

The Cycles of the Multiway Perfect Shuffle Permutation

2002· article· en· W120212917 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPermutation (music)MathematicsCombinatoricsDeckDiscrete mathematicsSpace (punctuation)AlgorithmComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The (k,n)-perfect shuffle, a generalisation of the 2-way perfect shuffle, cuts a deck of kn cards into k equal size decks and interleaves them perfectly with the first card of the last deck at the top, the first card of the second-to-last deck as the second card, and so on. It is formally defined to be the permutation ρ _k,n: i → ki \bmod (kn+1), for 1 ≤ i ≤ kn. We uncover the cycle structure of the (k,n)-perfect shuffle permutation by a group-theoretic analysis and show how to compute representative elements from its cycles by an algorithm using O(kn) time and O((\log kn)^2) space. Consequently it is possible to realise the (k,n)-perfect shuffle via an in-place, linear-time algorithm. Algorithms that accomplish this for the 2-way shuffle have already been demonstrated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it