MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032795059 · doi:10.1504/ijitcc.2011.042124

On the top-down evaluation of tree inclusion problem

2011· article· en· W2032795059 on OpenAlexaff
Yangjun Chen, Yibin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Technology Communications and Convergence · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsTree (set theory)MathematicsSpace (punctuation)Matching (statistics)Node (physics)Set (abstract data type)Discrete mathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the following tree-matching problem: Given labelled, ordered trees P and T, can P be obtained from T by deleting nodes. Deleting a node v entails removing all edges incident to v and, if v has a parent u, replacing the edges from u to v by edges from u to the children of v. The best known algorithm for this problem needs O('T'•'leaves(P)') time and O('leaves(P)'•min{DT•'leaves(T)'} + 'T' + 'P') space, where leaves(T) (resp. leaves(P)) stands for the set of the leaves of T (resp. P), and DT(resp. DP) for the height of T (resp. P). In this paper, we present a new algorithm that requires O('T'•'leaves(P)') time but only O('T' + 'P') space.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Technology Communications and ConvergenceSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207