Encoding and decoding algorithms for LP-decodable multipermutation codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LP-decodable multipermutation codes are a class of multipermutation codes that can be decoded using linear programming (LP). These codes are defined using linearly constrained multipermutation matrices, which are binary matrices that satisfy particular row sum and column sum constraints. Although generic LP solvers are capable of solving the LP decoding problem, they are not efficient in general because they do not leverage structures of the problem. This motivates us to study efficient decoding algorithms. In this paper, we focus on encoding and decoding algorithms for LP-decodable multipermutation codes. We first describe an algorithm that “ranks” multipermutations. In other words, it maps consecutive integers, one by one, to an ordered list of multipermutations. By leveraging this algorithm, we develop an encoding algorithm for a code proposed by Shieh and Tsai. Regarding decoding algorithms we propose an iterative decoding algorithm based on the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM), each iteration of which can be solved efficiently using off-the-shelf techniques. Finally, we study decoding performances of different decoders via simulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".