MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972326562 · doi:10.4018/jncr.2010070106

Response Curves for Cellular Automata in One and Two Dimensions

2010· article· en· W1972326562 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Natural Computing Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCellular Automata and Applications
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCellular automatonMathematicsBinary numberAutomatonFinite setDiscrete mathematicsStatistical physicsCombinatoricsPure mathematicsAlgorithmMathematical analysisComputer scienceTheoretical computer sciencePhysicsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the authors consider the problem of computing a response curve for binary cellular automata, that is, the curve describing the dependence of the density of ones after many iterations of the rule on the initial density of ones. The authors demonstrate how this problem could be approached using rule 130 as an example. For this rule, preimage sets of finite strings exhibit recognizable patterns; therefore, it is possible to compute both cardinalities of preimages of certain finite strings and probabilities of occurrence of these strings in a configuration obtained by iterating a random initial configuration n times. Response curves can be rigorously calculated in both one- and two-dimensional versions of CA rule 130. The authors also discuss a special case of totally disordered initial configurations, that is, random configurations where the density of ones and zeros are equal to 1/2.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.350 · 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