MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147412980 · doi:10.1109/ismvl.1994.302185

Many-valued generalizations of two finite intervals in Post's lattice

2002· article· en· W2147412980 on OpenAlexaff
Graham Denham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Algebra and Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnary operationNegationMathematicsPermutation (music)Finitely-generated abelian groupLattice (music)CombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsCountable setFinite setConstant (computer programming)Computer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E.L. Post's study (1941) shows that, although the lattice of clones in 2-valued logic is countably infinite, there exist only finitely many clones which contain both constants, and only finitely many which contain the negation function (neg). There are, however, uncountably many k-valued clones for all k>2; in fact, I. Agoston, et al. (1983) have shown that there are uncountably many containing all constants. One may also regard the set of constant functions of two-valued logic as an instance of the set of all noninvertible, unary functions over any finite domain. We show here that, for all k, there are indeed only finitely many clones containing all such functions. We also generalize those clones in Post's lattice which contain neg to the clones containing all permutation functions. Once again, it can be shown that there are only finitely many such clones. The latter result also serves to characterize the homogeneous relation algebras of R. Poschel (1979).< <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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Algebra and LogicFrench-language works237,207