MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163475593 · doi:10.1109/pccc.1991.113886

Keyboard optimization using genetic techniques

2002· article· en· W2163475593 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlphabetSet (abstract data type)Power setComputer scienceGenetic algorithmCharacter (mathematics)Finite setOptimization problemPower (physics)Theoretical computer scienceCombinatoricsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsMathematicsMachine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of optimizing a keyboard for a particular finite dictionary, H, defined as a subset of the words over a finite alphabet, A is considered. The letters of A are assigned to elements of a set K. Thus, associated with every element i in K is a set C/sub i/ such that the (C/sub i/) partitions A. The aim of the optimization problem is to compute the set (C/sub i/) so that if every character in A is replaced by the index of the set in which it belongs, the transformed version of H has the minimum number of collisions. Initially, the problem is stated to be NP-hard. Later, the authors discuss the power of using genetic techniques to tackle the problem. The authors present the details of the only reported evolutionary method, and then a novel genetic solution is proposed. Experimental results demonstrating the power of this scheme are included.< <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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207