MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122580274 · doi:10.1109/ismvl.1994.302205

Enumeration of function and bases of three-valued set logic under compositions with Boolean functions

2002· article· en· W2122580274 on OpenAlexaff
János Demetrovics, Corina Reischer, Dan A. Simovici, Ivan Stojmenović

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Algebra and Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnary operationBoolean functionMathematicsSet (abstract data type)Discrete mathematicsBoolean algebraBoolean expressionTupleFunction (biology)Product termParity functionBoolean domainBoolean data typeEnumerationCombinatoricsTwo-element Boolean algebraAlgebra over a fieldComputer sciencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses some classification and enumeration problems in r-valued set logic, which is the logic of functions mapping n-tuples of subsets into subsets over r values. Boolean functions are convenient choice as building blocks in the design of set logic functions. Weak maximal sets are these containing all Boolean functions. The authors give the number of n-ary functions in each weak maximal set and and some properties of intersections of weak maximal sets in r-valued set logic. These properties are used to classify all three-valued set logic functions according to the weak maximal sets they belong to. They prove that there are 29 such classes of functions and give a unary function representative for each of them. Finally, they find the number of n-ary weak Sheffer functions of three-valued set logic, i.e. functions which are complete under compositions with Boolean functions.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Algebra and LogicFrench-language works237,207