MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121484689 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2013.13.120317

Grobner Bases for Lattices and an Algebraic Decoding Algorithm

2013· article· en· W2121484689 on OpenAlex
Malihe Aliasgari, Mohammad‐Reza Sadeghi, Daniel Panario

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 Transactions on Communications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGröbner basisDecoding methodsAlgebraic numberAlgorithmComputer scienceBerlekamp–Welch algorithmList decodingSequential decodingAlgebra over a fieldMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceBlock codeComputationConcatenated error correction codePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present Grobner bases for lattices given in a general form, including integer and non-integer lattices. Grdot{o}bner bases for binary linear codes were introduced by Borges-Quintana et al. . We extend their work to non-binary group block codes. Then, given a lattice Λ and its associated label code L, which is a group code, we define an ideal for L. A Grobner basis is assigned to Λ as the Grobner basis of its label code L. Since the associated label code for integer and non-integer lattices are group codes, the assigned Grobner bases can be obtained for both cases. Using this Grobner basis an algebraic decoding algorithm is introduced. We provide an example of the decoding method for a lower dimension lattice. We explain that the complexity of this decoding method depends on the division algorithm and show this decoding method has polynomial time complexity. Experiments for some versions of root lattices (E_7 and E_8) show that for low SNR the performance of these lattices is near to the lower bounds given in .

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.256 · 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