MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169348983 · doi:10.4230/lipics.stacs.2014.149

Palindrome Recognition In The Streaming Model

2014· article· en· W2169348983 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

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstringPalindromeString (physics)MathematicsSublinear functionCombinatoricsSquare rootAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceData structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A palindrome is defined as a string which reads forwards the same as backwards, like, for example, the string "racecar". In the Palindrome Problem, one tries to find all palindromes in a given string. In contrast, in the case of the Longest Palindromic Substring Problem, the goal is to find an arbitrary one of the longest palindromes in the string. In this paper we present three algorithms in the streaming model for the the above problems, where at any point in time we are only allowed to use sublinear space. We first present a one-pass randomized algorithm that solves the Palindrome Problem. It has an additive error and uses square root of n space. We also give two variants of the algorithm which solve related and practical problems. The second algorithm determines the exact locations of all longest palindromes using two passes and square root of n space. The third algorithm is a one-pass randomized algorithm, which solves the Longest Palindromic Substring Problem. It has a multiplicative error using only O(log(n)) space.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.227 · 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