Bibliographic record
Abstract
Randomness of a sequence refers to the unpredictablity of the sequence. Any deterministically generated sequence used in practical applications is not truly random. The best that can be done here is to single out certain properties as being associated with randomness and to accept any sequence that has these properties as random or more properly, a pseudorandom sequence. In this chapter, we will discuss the randomness of sequences whose elements are taken from a finite field. In Section 5.1, we present Golomb's three randomness postulates for binary sequences, namely the balance property, the run property, and the (ideal) two-level autocorrelation property, and the extension of these randomness postulates to nonbinary sequences. M -sequences over a finite field possess many extraordinary randomness properties except for having the lowest possible linear span, which has stimulated researchers to seek nonlinear sequences with similarly such favorable properties for years. In Section 5.2, we show that m -sequences satisfy Golomb's three randomness postulates. In Section 5.3, we introduce the interleaved structures of m -sequences and the subfield decomposition of m -sequences. In Sections 5.4–5.6, we present the shift-and-add property, constant-on-cosets property, and 2-tuple balance property of m -sequences, respectively. The last section is devoted to the classification of binary sequences of period 2 n − 1. Golomb's randomness postulates and randomness criteria We discussed some general properties of auto- and crosscorrelation in Chapter 1 for sequences whose elements are taken from the real number field or the complex number field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".