Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whenever we have data represented by constraints (such as order, linear, polynomial, etc.), running time for many constraint processing algorithms can be considerably lowered if it is known that certain variables in those constraints are independent of each other. For example, when one deals with spatial and temporal databases given by constraints, the projection operation, which corresponds to quantifier elimination, is usually the costliest. Since the behavior of many quantifier elimination algorithms becomes worse as the dimension increases, eliminating certain variables from consideration helps speed up those algorithms.While these observations have been made in the literature, it remained unknown when the problem of testing if certain variables are independent is decidable, and how to efficiently construct a new representation of a constraint-set in which those variables do not appear together in the same atomic constraints. Here we answer this question. We first consider a general condition that gives us decidability of variable independence; this condition is stated in terms of model-theoretic properties of the structures corresponding to constraint classes. We then show that this condition covers the domains most relevant to spatial and temporal applications. For some of these domains, including linear and polynomial constraints over the reals, we provide a uniform decision procedure that gives us tractability as well. For those constraints, we also present a polynomial-time algorithm for producing nice constraint representations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".