MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407080619

Low uniform versions of NC1.

2011· article· en· W2407080619 on OpenAlexaff
Christoph Behle, Andreas Krebs, Klaus-Jörn Lange, Pierre McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic colloquium on computational complexity · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacterization (materials science)LogarithmPower (physics)Electronic circuitMathematicsComputer scienceValue (mathematics)Word (group theory)Discrete mathematicsCombinatoricsAlgorithmTopology (electrical circuits)GeometryPhysicsMathematical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the setting known as DLOGTIME-uniformity, the fundamental complexity classes AC ⊂ ACC ⊆ TC ⊆ NC have several robust characterizations. In this paper we refine uniformity further and examine the impact of these refinements on NC and its subclasses. When applied to the logarithmic circuit depth characterization of NC, some refinements leave NC unchanged while others collapse NC to NC. Thus we study refinements of other circuit characterizations of NC. In the case of the AC(A5) characterization of NC , where A5 is the NC-complete word problem of the group A5, our refinements collapse NC to a subset of the regular languages. For the AC(D+) characterizations of NC, where D+ is the NC-complete language capturing the formula value problem, interestingly, these refinements scale down to circuits with linear fan-in. In particular, the latter refinements bring to the fore two classes, denoted FO[<]-uniform AC(D+)LIN and FO[<]uniform TCLIN , whose separation may be within the reach of current lower bound techniques, and whose separation would amount to distinguishing the power of a MAJ gate from that of a D+ gate.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic colloquium on computational complexitySame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207