MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074221742 · doi:10.1142/s0129054108005838

STATE COMPLEXITY OF UNION AND INTERSECTION OF FINITE LANGUAGES

2008· article· en· W2074221742 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 Foundations of Computer Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-state machineDeterministic finite automatonAlphabetIntersection (aeronautics)Regular languageNondeterministic finite automatonMathematicsUpper and lower boundsAutomatonState (computer science)Discrete mathematicsFinite stateQuantum finite automataCombinatoricsComputer scienceAutomata theoryTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the state complexity of union and intersection for finite languages. Note that the problem of obtaining the tight bounds for both operations was open. First we compute upper bounds using structural properties of minimal deterministic finite-state automata for finite languages. Then, we show that the upper bounds are tight if we have a variable sized alphabet that can depend on the size of input deterministic finite-state automata. In addition, we prove that the upper bounds are unreachable for any fixed sized alphabet.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · 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