MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509287145 · doi:10.3233/fi-2009-202

Combinatorics of Unique Maximal Factorization Families (UMFFs)

2009· article· en· W1509287145 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamenta Informaticae · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCentre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
KeywordsLexicographical orderCombinatoricsFactorizationMathematicsAlphabetString (physics)Set (abstract data type)Word (group theory)Discrete mathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suppose a set W of strings contains exactly one rotation (cyclic shift) of every primitive string on some alphabet Σ. Then W is a circ-UMFF if and only if every word in Σ has a unique maximal factorization over W. The classic circ-UMFF is the set of Lyndon words based on lexicographic ordering (1958). Duval (1983) designed a linear sequential Lyndon factorization algorithm; a corresponding PRAMparallel algorithmwas described by J. Daykin, Iliopoulos and Smyth (1994). Daykin and Daykin defined new circ-UMFFs based on various methods for totally ordering sets of strings (2003), and further described the structure of all circ-UMFFs (2008). Here we prove new combinatorial results for circ-UMFFs, and in particular for the case of Lyndon words. We introduce Acrobat and Flight Deck circ-UMFFs, and describe some of our results in terms of dictionaries. Applications of circ-UMFFs pertain to structured methods for concatenating and factoring strings over ordered alphabets, and those of Lyndon words are wide ranging and multidisciplinary.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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