MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064212735 · doi:10.1017/s0963548307008796

An Analysis of the Height of Tries with Random Weights on the Edges

2007· article· en· W2064212735 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

VenueCombinatorics Probability Computing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrieCombinatoricsMathematicsExponentString (physics)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionSet (abstract data type)AlphabetFunction (biology)Discrete mathematicsComputer scienceData structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyse the weighted height of random tries built from independent strings of i.i.d. symbols on the finite alphabet {1, . . . d }. The edges receive random weights whose distribution depends upon the number of strings that visit that edge. Such a model covers the hybrid tries of de la Briandais and the TST of Bentley and Sedgewick, where the search time for a string can be decomposed as a sum of processing times for each symbol in the string. Our weighted trie model also permits one to study maximal path imbalance. In all cases, the weighted height is shown to be asymptotic to c log n in probability, where c is determined by the behaviour of the core of the trie (the part where all nodes have a full set of children) and the fringe of the trie (the part of the trie where nodes have only one child and form spaghetti -like trees). It can be found by maximizing a function that is related to the Cramér exponent of the distribution of the edge weights.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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