MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082796216 · doi:10.1142/s0129054108006169

STATE COMPLEXITY OF THE SUBWORD CLOSURE OPERATION WITH APPLICATIONS TO DNA CODING

2008· article· en· W2082796216 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
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Biological Computing
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosure (psychology)Constraint (computer-aided design)Upper and lower boundsState (computer science)Coding (social sciences)Regular languageComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Theoretical computer scienceMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsAlgorithmAutomatonProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are interested in the state complexity of languages that are defined via the subword closure operation. The subword closure of a set S of fixed-length words is the set of all words w for which any subword of w of the fixed length is in S. This type of constraint appears to be useful in various situations related to data encodings and in particular to DNA encodings. We present a few results related to this concept. In particular we give a general upper bound on the state complexity of a subword closed language and show that this bound is tight infinitely often. We also discuss the state complexity of DNA computing related cases of the subword closure operation.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.268 · 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