Grounding for model expansion in k-guarded formulas with inductive definitions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitchell and Ternovska [49, 50] propose a constraint programming framework for search problems that is based on classical logic extended with inductive definitions. They for-mulate a search problem as the problem of model expansion (MX). In this framework, the problem is encoded in a logic, an instance of the problem is represented by a finite structure, and a solver generates solutions to the problem. This approach relies on propositionalisation of high-level specifications, and on the efficiency of modern SAT solvers. Here, we propose an efficient algorithm which combines grounding with partial evaluation. Since the MX framework is based on classical logic, we are able to take advantage of known results for the so-called guarded fragments and their generalizations. In the case of k-guarded formulas with inductive definitions under a natural restriction, the algorithm performs much better than naive grounding by relying on connections between k-guarded formulas and tree de-compositions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it