MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396953629

An Improved Deterministic #SAT Algorithm for Small De Morgan Formulas.

2013· article· en· W2396953629 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

VenueElectronic colloquium on computational complexity · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsTime complexityAlgorithmConstructivestructRunning timeDeterministic algorithmDiscrete mathematicsComputational complexity theoryRandom variableCombinatoricsComputer scienceStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give a deterministic #SAT algorithm for de Morgan formulas of size up to $$n^{2.63}$$n2.63, which runs in time $$2^{n-n^{{\varOmega }(1)}}$$2n-nΩ(1). This improves upon the deterministic #SAT algorithm of Chen et al. (Proceedings of the twenty-ninth annual IEEE conference on computational complexity, 2014), which has similar running time but works only for formulas of size less than $$n^{2.5}$$n2.5. Our new algorithm is based on the shrinkage of de Morgan formulas under random restrictions, shown by Paterson and Zwick (Random Struct Algorithms 4(2):135---150, 1993). We prove a concentrated and constructive version of their shrinkage result. Namely, we give a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm that selects variables in a given de Morgan formula so that, with high probability over the random assignments to the chosen variables, the original formula shrinks in size, when simplified using a given deterministic polynomial-time formula-simplification algorithm.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.254 · 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