Parallel RAMs with owned global memory and deterministic context-free language recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We identify and study a natural and frequently occurring subclass of Concurrent Read, Exclusive Write Parallel Random Access Machines (CREW-PRAMs). Called Concurrent Read, Owner Write, or CROW-PRAMS, these are machines in which each global memory location is assigned a unique “owner” processor, which is the only processor allowed to write into it. Considering the difficulties that would be involved in physically realizinga full CREW-PRAM model and demonstrate its stability under several definitional changes. Second, we precisely characterize the power of the CROW-PRAM by showing that the class of languages recognizable by it in time O (log n) (and implicity with a polynomial number of processors) is exactly the class LOGDCFL of languages log space reducible to deterministic context-free languages. Third, using the same basic machinery, we show that the recognition problem for deterministic context-free languages can be solved quickly on a deterministic auxilliary pushdown automation having random access to its input tape, a log n space work tape, and pushdown store of small maximum height. For example, time O ( n 1 + ε ) is achievable with pushdown height O (log 2 n ). These result extend and unify work of von Braunmöhl, Cook, Mehlhorn, and Verbeek, Klein and Reif; and Rytter.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".