MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485181793 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808876

A Second Course in Formal Languages and Automata Theory

2008· book· en· W1485181793 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Shallit

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2008
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormal languageAbstract family of languagesComputer scienceLemma (botany)ParsingAutomatonContext-free languageAutomata theoryChomsky hierarchyPumping lemma for regular languagesContext (archaeology)Programming languageCourse (navigation)Turing machineSecond-generation programming languageArtificial intelligenceComputationRule-based machine translationFifth-generation programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Written for graduate students and advanced undergraduates in computer science, A Second Course in Formal Languages and Automata Theory treats topics in the theory of computation not usually covered in a first course. After a review of basic concepts, the book covers combinatorics on words, regular languages, context-free languages, parsing and recognition, Turing machines, and other language classes. Many topics often absent from other textbooks, such as repetitions in words, state complexity, the interchange lemma, 2DPDAs, and the incompressibility method, are covered here. The author places particular emphasis on the resources needed to represent certain languages. The book also includes a diverse collection of more than 200 exercises, suggestions for term projects, and research problems that remain open.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1460.070

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations206
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207