MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133334995 · doi:10.1142/s021819670900524x

OMITTING TYPES, BOUNDED WIDTH AND THE ABILITY TO COUNT

2009· article· en· W2133334995 on OpenAlexafffund
Benoît Larose, Matthew Valeriote, László Zádori

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Algebra and Computation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Algebra and Logic
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNemzeti Fejlesztési ÜgynökségFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesHungarian Scientific Research FundCentre de Recherches Mathématiques
KeywordsUnary operationMathematicsBounded functionVariety (cybernetics)Type (biology)Discrete mathematicsAffine transformationAlgebra over a fieldCombinatoricsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We say that a finite algebra 𝔸 = 〈A; F〉 has the ability to count if there are subalgebras C of 𝔸3 and Z of 𝔸 such that the structure 〈A; C, Z〉 has the ability to count in the sense of Feder and Vardi. We show that for a core relational structure A the following conditions are equivalent: (i) the variety generated by the algebra 𝔸 associated to A contains an algebra with the ability to count; (ii) 𝔸2 has the ability to count; (iii) the variety generated by 𝔸 admits the unary or affine type. As a consequence, for CSP's of finite signature, the bounded width conjectures stated in Feder–Vardi [10], Larose–Zádori [17] and Bulatov [5] are identical.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.027
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Algebra and ComputationSame topicAdvanced Algebra and LogicFrench-language works237,207