MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135607994 · doi:10.1142/9789812778857_0004

MODULAR COMPUTATION FOR MATRICES OF ORE POLYNOMIALS

2007· article· en· W2135607994 on OpenAlexaff
Howard Cheng, George Labahn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designComputationAlgebra over a fieldComputer scienceMathematicsTheoretical computer sciencePure mathematicsAlgorithmProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give a modular algorithm to perform row reduction of a matrix of Ore polynomials with coefficients in Z[t]. Both the transformation matrix and the transformed matrix are computed. The algorithm can be used for finding the rank and left nullspace of such matrices. In the special case of shift polynomials, we obtain algorithms for computing a weak Popov form and for computing a greatest common right divisor (GCRD) and a least common left multiple (LCLM) of matrices of shift polynomials. Our algorithms improve on existing fraction-free algorithms and can be viewed as generalizations of the work of Li and Nemes on GCRDs and LCLMs of Ore polynomials. We define lucky homomorphisms, determine the appropriate normalization, as well as bound the number of homomorphic images required. Our algorithm is output-sensitive, such that the number of homomorphic images required depends on the size of the output. Furthermore, there is no need to verify the result by trial division or multiplication. When our algorithm is used to compute a GCRD and a LCLM of shift polynomials, we obtain a new output-sensitive modular algorithm. 1.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207