MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116143063

The LLL algorithm using fast givens

2011· article· en· W2116143063 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

VenueIEEE Asia-Pacific Conference on Synthetic Aperture Radar · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLattice reductionBasis (linear algebra)Lattice (music)Lattice problemReduction (mathematics)AlgorithmTime complexityMathematicsCryptographyPolynomialComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1 Introduction The LLL algorithm originated from Lenstra, Lenstra, and L. Lovasz [3] is a lattice basis reduction method. The complexity of the problem of lattice basis reduction is know to be nonpolynomial in general. It is shown in [3] that their lattice basis reduction algorithm has polynomial complexity when the basis vectors are integer or rational. In their paper, the basis reduction algorithm is used to develop the first polynomial time algorithm for factorizing polynomials with rational coefficients. Besides, the LLL algorithm has been widely used in many fields of computer science and mathematics, particularly in cryptology and communications [6].

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.196 · 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