Computing Maximal Error-detecting Capabilities and Distances of Regular Languages
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A (combinatorial) channel consists of pairs of words representing all possible input-output channel situations. In a past paper, we formalized the intuitive concept of “largest amount of errors” detectable by a given language L, by defining the maximal error-detecting capabilities of L with respect to a given class of channels, and we showed how to compute all maximal error-detecting capabilities (channels) of a given regular language with respect to the class of rational channels and a class of channels involving only the substitution-error type. In this paper we resolve the problem for channels involving any combination of the basic error types: substitution, insertion, deletion. Moreover, we consider the problem of finding the inverses of these channels, in view of the fact that L is error-detecting for γ if and only if it is error-detecting for the inverse of γ. We also discuss a natural method of reducing the problem of computing (inner) distances of a given regular language L to the problem of computing maximal error-detecting capabilities of L.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it