MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965196198 · doi:10.1002/rsa.10011

Analysis of Rabin's irreducibility test for polynomials over finite fields

2001· article· en· W1965196198 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRandom Structures and Algorithms · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooCarleton University
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsIrreducibilityMathematicsDegree (music)CombinatoricsPrime (order theory)Prime factorFinite fieldDivisor (algebraic geometry)PolynomialDiscrete mathematicsExpected valueIrreducible polynomialPure mathematicsStatisticsMatrix polynomial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We give a precise average‐case analysis of Rabin's algorithm for testing the irreducibility of polynomials over finite fields. The main technical contribution of the article is the study of the probability that a random polynomial of degree n contains an irreducible factor of degree dividing several maximal divisors of the degree n . We then study the expected value and the variance of the number of operations performed by the algorithm. We present an exact analysis when n = p 1 and n = p 1 p 2 for p 1 , p 2 prime numbers, and an asymptotic analysis for the general case. Our method generalizes to other algorithms that deal with similar divisor conditions. In particular, we analyze the average‐case number of operations for two variants of Rabin's algorithm, and determine the ordering of prime divisors of n that minimizes the leading factor. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Random Struct. Alg., 19: 525–551, 2001

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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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