MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047736902 · doi:10.1080/17445760903225700

A (4<i>n</i> − 9)/3 diagnosis algorithm for generalised cube networks

2010· article· en· W2047736902 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Parallel Emergent and Distributed Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypercubeMultiprocessingComputer scienceCube (algebra)AlgorithmSet (abstract data type)Component (thermodynamics)MathematicsCombinatoricsParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the t/k-diagnosis is to isolate all faulty processors (nodes) in a multiprocessor system to within a set of nodes in which at most k nodes are correct, provided the number of faulty nodes does not exceed t. As compared to the classical precise diagnosis strategy, the t/k-diagnosis strategy can significantly improve the self-diagnosing capability of multiprocessor system. The generalised cube network (GCN), or equivalently the BC graphs, is a regular topology, which provides a unified view of the hypercube and some of its variants. This paper addressed the t/k-diagnosis of GCNs. By exploring the relationship between the size of a largest connected component of the 0-test subgraph of a faulty GCN and the distribution of the faulty nodes over the network, an time (4n − 9)/3 diagnosis algorithm on an n-dimensional GCN is presented, where N = 2 n is the total number of the nodes of the network being diagnosed. To our knowledge, this is the first time to give a t/k-diagnosis algorithm for GCNs and .

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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