MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989618424 · doi:10.1145/1005285.1005321

Maximal quotient rational reconstruction

2004· article· en· W1989618424 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModuloMathematicsInteger (computer science)QuotientRational numberProduct (mathematics)Discrete mathematicsImage (mathematics)CombinatoricsBinary logarithmAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let n/d ∈ Q, m be a positive integer and let u = n/d mod m. Thus $u$ is the image of a rational number modulo m. The rational reconstruction problem is; given u and m find n/d. A solution was first given by Wang in 1981. Wang's algorithm outputs n/d when m > 2 M2 where M = max(|n|,d). Because of the wide application of this algorithm in computer algebra, several authors have investigated its practical efficiency and asymptotic time complexity.In this paper we present a new solution which is almost optimal in the following sense; with controllable high probability, our algorithm will output n/d when m is a modest number of bits longer than 2 |n| d. This means that in a modular algorithm where m is a product of primes, the modular algorithm will need one or two primes more than the minimum necessary to reconstruct n/d; thus if |n| ⇐ d or d ⇐ |n| the new algorithm saves up to half the number of primes. Further, our algorithm will fail with high probability when m < 2 |n| d.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207