MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W124382047

On the structure of a generalization of weakly associative lattices.

2002· article· en· W124382047 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
András Gács, Péter Sziklai

Bibliographic record

VenueArs Combinatoria · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntisymmetric relationMathematicsAssociative propertyEquivalence relationCombinatoricsInteger (computer science)Upper and lower boundsPure mathematicsRelation (database)Discrete mathematicsMathematical analysisComputer scienceMathematical physics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of weakly associative lattices (i.e. relational systems with a reflexive and antisymmetric relation ≤, in which for each pair of elements there exist a least upper and a greatest lower bound) was introduced in [3] and [5]. In [4] WU-systems are defined, i.e. weakly associative lattices with the unique bound property, and their equivalence with projective planes is described. In this paper we introduce WUλ -systems, and discuss their relation to symmetric 2−(v, k, λ) designs equipped with a special “loop-free” mapping. The concept of weakly associative lattices (i.e. relational systems with a reflexive and antisymmetric relation ≤, in which for each pair of elements there exist a least upper and a greatest lower bound) was introduced in [3] and [5]. Ervin Fried and Vera T. Sos defined WU-systems in [4]; i.e. weakly associative lattices with the unique bound property; their equivalence with projective planes is described in [4]. In this paper we introduce WUλ systems (here ‘U’ stands for ‘uniform’), and discuss their relation to symmetric 2−(v, k, λ) designs equipped with a special “loop-free” mapping. Definition. Let V = 〈V,≤〉 be a system with a reflexive and antisymmetric relation ≤. Let U(v) = {w ∈ V : v ≤ w} and L(v) = {w ∈ V : w ≤ v} for each v ∈ V . Given a positive integer λ, we call V a WUλ -system if for each v1 6= v2 ∈ V both of the sets U(v1) ∩ U(v2) and L(v1) ∩ L(v2) has size λ. Note that for λ = 1 we get WU-systems of [4]. Remark. The Paley tournaments for (prime power) q = 4k − 1 give a series of examples for WUλ -systems with λ = (q + 1)/4. (V = GF (q), and for a, b ∈ GF (q) define a ≤ b iff (b− a) is a square element of GF (q).) Definition. A 2 − (v, k, λ) design (sometimes they are denoted by Sλ(2, k, v)) is an incidence structure D = (P,B), where the elements of P are called points, the elements B ∈ B are subsets of P called blocks, and |P| = v, |B| = k for all B ∈ B, and for any pair of distinct points there are exactly λ blocks containing both of them. A design is called symmetric, if |P| = |B|; in this case v = k(k−1) λ + 1 holds ([2]). ∗Research was partially supported by OTKA and Eotvos grants.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArs CombinatoriaSame topicgraph theory and CDMA systemsFrench-language works237,207