MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1712117507 · doi:10.37236/3053

Nested Recursions, Simultaneous Parameters and Tree Superpositions

2014· preprint· en· W1712117507 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Abraham Isgur, Vitaly Kuznetsov, Mustazee Rahman, Stephen M. Tanny

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArityRecursion (computer science)Tree (set theory)Sequence (biology)CombinatoricsNatural numberMathematicsOrder (exchange)Discrete mathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply a tree-based methodology to solve new, very broadly defined families of nested recursions of the general form $R(n)=\sum_{t=1}^k R(n-a_t-\sum_{i=1}^{p}R(n-b_{ti}))$, where $a_t$ are integers, $b_{ti}$ are natural numbers, and $k,p$ are natural numbers that we use to denote "arity" and "order," respectively, and with some specified initial conditions. The key idea of the tree-based solution method is to associate such recursions with infinite labelled trees in a natural way so that the solution to the recursions solves a counting question relating to the corresponding trees. We characterize certain recursion families within $R(n)$ by introducing "simultaneous parameters" that appear both within the recursion itself and that also specify structural properties of the corresponding tree. First, we extend and unify recently discovered results concerning two families of arity $k=2$, order $p=1$ recursions. Next, we investigate the solution of nested recursion families by taking linear combinations of solution sequence frequencies for simpler nested recursions, which correspond to superpositions of the associated trees; this leads us to identify and solve two new recursion families for arity $k=2$ and general order $p$. Finally, we extend these results to general arity $k>2$. We conclude with several related open problems.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207