On Factor Graphs and the Fourier Transform
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
We introduce the concept of convolutional factor graphs, which represent convolutional factorizations of multivariate functions, just as conventional (multiplicative) factor graphs represent multiplicative factorizations. Convolutional and multiplicative factor graphs arise as natural Fourier transform duals. In coding theory applications, algebraic duality of group codes is essentially an instance of Fourier transform duality. Convolutional factor graphs arise when a code is represented as a sum of subcodes, just as conventional multiplicative factor graphs arise when a code is represented as an intersection of supercodes. With auxiliary variables, convolutional factor graphs give rise to "syndrome realizations" of codes, just as multiplicative factor graphs with auxiliary variables give rise to "state realizations." We introduce normal and co-normal extensions of a multivariate function, which essentially allow a given function to be represented with either a multiplicative or a convolutional factorization, as is convenient. We use these function extensions to derive a number of duality relationships among the corresponding factor graphs, and use these relationships to obtain the duality properties of Forney graphs as a special case.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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