MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046033718 · doi:10.1142/s0129054103002151

LINEAR-TIME PRIME DECOMPOSITION OF REGULAR PREFIX CODES

2003· article· en· W2046033718 on OpenAlexaff
Jurek Czyzowicz, Wojciech Frączak, Andrzej Pelc, Wojciech Rytter

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrefix codeConcatenation (mathematics)PrefixPrime (order theory)MathematicsDiscrete mathematicsRegular languageCombinatoricsLinear codeAutomatonComputer scienceAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceBlock codeDecoding methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the new approaches to data classification uses prefix codes and finite state automata as representations of prefix codes. A prefix code is a (possibly infinite) set of strings such that no string is a prefix of another one. An important task driven by the need for the efficient storage of such automata in memory is the decomposition (in the sense of formal languages concatenation) of prefix codes into prime factors. We investigate properties of such prefix code decompositions. A prime decomposition is a decomposition of a prefix code into a concatenation of nontrivial prime prefix codes. A prefix code is prime if it cannot be decomposed into at least two nontrivial prefix codes. In the paper a linear time algorithm is designed which finds the prime decomposition F1F2…Fk of a regular prefix code F given by its minimal deterministic automaton. Our results are especially interesting for infinite regular prefix codes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207