MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043879721 · doi:10.1145/2733693.2733709

Fraction-Free Factoring Revisited

2015· article· en· W2043879721 on OpenAlexaff
Johannes Middeke, David J. Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueACM communications in computer algebra · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraction (chemistry)UnivariateGaussian eliminationMathematicsFactoringMatrix (chemical analysis)GaussianAlgorithmComputer scienceApplied mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematicsStatisticsMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We revisit fraction-free Gaussian elimination as a method for finding exact solutions of linear systems over integral domains, specifically integers and univariate polynomials. We conducted several experiments regarding common folklore about these methods such as pivoting strategies. Moreover, we find that the classical algorithms produce a unsettlingly high amount of common factors in the rows of the resulting matrices which they seem unable to detect let alone remove. We present preliminary results on remedying this fact. Finally, we apply fraction-free elimination to compute matrix inverses and to solve linear systems, and compare that to the use of fractional methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0080.006
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM communications in computer algebraSame topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207