MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111476730 · doi:10.1142/s0129054113400248

GOODBY TO THE KINDHEARTED DRAGON PROF. SHENG YU, 1950–2012

2013· article· en· W2111476730 on OpenAlexaff
Arto Salomaa, Kai Salomaa, Andrew L. Szilard

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerosityDiligenceWifeComputer scienceFriendshipSociologyConversationLawPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professor Sheng Yu passed away on January 23, 2012, the first day of the Lunar New Year, the Year of the Dragon. He was only sixty-one years old. His death was a tremendous loss to his family, friends, colleagues, co-workers, co-authors, co-editors, members of conference program committees, students, the theoretical Computer Science Community and especially to his beloved wife, Lizhen. Through his teachings, international committee work, seminars and some 150 refereed publications, he left us a huge legacy of many interesting and important research contributions in the areas of the theory and implementation of automata and formal languages, fuzzy logic, object-oriented modeling methodologies, parallel processing for parallel programming languages, important software projects for automata theory research, the creation of the international Conference on Implementation and Application of Automata (CIAA) and a gallery of vivid memories of the wonderful times shared. He is remembered for his enormous energy, competence, diligence, anticipatory thoughtfulness, over-the-top generosity, measured politeness, noble sportsmanship and committed friendship. This paper, an extension of a talk with a similar title at DLT 2012, is an account how we are commemorating Sheng.

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 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 score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0050.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207