MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1846413981 · doi:10.46298/dmtcs.2988

Some exact asymptotics in the counting of walks in the quarter plane

2012· article· en· W1846413981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guy Fayolle, Kilian Raschel

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnumerationPlanarQuarter (Canadian coin)Lattice (music)Plane (geometry)MathematicsCombinatoricsProbability and statisticsCounting problemStatistical physicsDiscrete mathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceStatisticsGeometryGeographyComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enumeration of planar lattice walks is a classical topic in combinatorics, at the cross-roads of several domains (e.g., probability, statistical physics, computer science). The aim of this paper is to propose a new approach to obtain some exact asymptotics for walks confined to the quarter plane.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer ScienceSame topicAdvanced Combinatorial MathematicsFrench-language works237,207