MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991852511 · doi:10.1145/2608628.2608671

Sparse interpolation over finite fields via low-order roots of unity

2014· article· en· W1991852511 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Arnold, Mark Giesbrecht, Daniel S. Roche

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVNational Science Foundation
KeywordsInterpolation (computer graphics)A priori and a posterioriProbabilistic logicFinite fieldMathematicsPolynomial interpolationMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmPolynomialApplied mathematicsProbabilistic analysis of algorithmsOrder (exchange)Discrete mathematicsDegree (music)CombinatoricsComputer scienceLinear interpolationMathematical analysisStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new Monte Carlo algorithm for the interpolation of a straight-line program as a sparse polynomial f over an arbitrary finite field of size q. We assume a priori bounds D and T are given on the degree and number of terms of f. The approach presented in this paper is a hybrid of the diversified and recursive interpolation algorithms, the two previous fastest known probabilistic methods for this problem. By making effective use of the information contained in the coefficients themselves, this new algorithm improves on the bit complexity of previous methods by a "soft-Oh" factor of T, log D, or log q.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNumerical Methods and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207