MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W199059760 · doi:10.1142/s0129626401000646

ON THE NECESSITY OF FORMAL MODELS FOR REAL-TIME PARALLEL COMPUTATIONS

2001· article· en· W199059760 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

VenueParallel Processing Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTuring machineComputer scienceComputationUniversal Turing machineSuper-recursive algorithmModel of computationTime hierarchy theoremTuring machine examplesProbabilistic Turing machineTheoretical computer scienceHierarchyNSPACEDescription numberReal numberTime complexityTheory of computationFormal proofTuringAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assume the multitape real-time Turing machine as a formal model for parallel real-time computation. Then, we show that, for any positive integer k, there is at least one language L k which is accepted by a k-tape real-Turing machine, but cannot be accepted by a (k - 1)-tape real-time Turing machine. It follows therefore that the languages accepted by real-time Turing machines form an infinite hierarchy with respect to the number of tapes used. Although this result was previously obtained elsewhere, our proof is considerably shorter, and explicitly builds the languages L k . The ability of the real-time Turing machine to model practical real-time and/or parallel computations is open to debate. Nevertheless, our result shows how a complexity theory based on a formal model can draw interesting results that are of more general nature than those derived from examples. Thus, we hope to offer a motivation for looking into realistic parallel real-time models of computation.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.240 · 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