MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154983517 · doi:10.1002/jcd.20203

On the amicability of orthogonal designs

2009· article· en· W2154983517 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Designs · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsOrthogonal arrayCombinatoricsCombinatorial designInteger (computer science)Order (exchange)Zero (linguistics)Construct (python library)Connection (principal bundle)Space (punctuation)Discrete mathematicsStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although it is known that the maximum number of variables in two amicable orthogonal designs of order 2 n p , where p is an odd integer, never exceeds 2 n +2, not much is known about the existence of amicable orthogonal designs lacking zero entries that have 2 n +2 variables in total. In this paper we develop two methods to construct amicable orthogonal designs of order 2 n p where p odd, with no zero entries and with the total number of variables equal or nearly equal to 2 n +2. In doing so, we make a surprising connection between the two concepts of amicable sets of matrices and an amicable pair of matrices. With the recent discovery of a link between the theory of amicable orthogonal designs and space‐time codes, this paper may have applications in space‐time codes. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Combin Designs 17: 240‐252, 2009

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.205 · 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