MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066454279 · doi:10.1142/s0129054106004194

SORTING SIGNED PERMUTATIONS BY FIXED-LENGTH REVERSALS

2006· article· en· W2066454279 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xingqin Qi, Guojun Li, Jichang Wu, Bingqiang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenome Rearrangement Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMcMaster University
KeywordsMathematicsSocial connectednessCombinatoricsPermutation (music)SortingParity of a permutationSign (mathematics)Discrete mathematicsCyclic permutationAlgorithmSymmetric groupPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A signed n-permutation is a permutation on {1,2,…,n} in which each element is labelled by a positive or negative sign. Here we consider the problem of sorting signed permutations by fixed-length reversals. Indeed, limiting the transformations to reversals of length exactly k can be very restrictive, for example, (+1,+3,+2,+4,…,+n) can never be sorted to (+1,+2,+3,+4,…,+n) by 2-reversals. That is, for given two signed permutations it is not obvious whether they can be sorted to each other by k-reversals. Thus in 1996, Chen and Skiena gave the following open problem: what is the connectedness of signed permutations under fixed-length reversals? In this paper, we resolve this open problem when "fixed-length" is even, and give a characterization of the connectedness of signed n-permutations under 2l-reversal, for both linear and circular permutations.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicGenome Rearrangement AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207