MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468783835

A Short Proof on the Cardinality of Maximal Positive Bases

2010· article· fr· W2468783835 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

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardinality (data modeling)Mathematical proofMathematicsBounded functionSimple (philosophy)Discrete mathematicsBasis (linear algebra)CombinatoricsLinear programmingLinear spanSet (abstract data type)Property (philosophy)Upper and lower boundsAlgorithmComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A positive basis is a minimal set of vectors whose nonnegative linear combinations span the entire space \({\mathbb R^{n}}\). Interest in positive bases was revived in the late nineties by the introduction and analysis of some classes of direct search optimization algorithms. It is easily shown that the cardinality of every positive basis is bounded below by n + 1. There are proofs in the literature that 2n is a valid upper bound for the cardinality, but these proofs are quite technical and require several pages. The purpose of this note is to provide a simple demonstration that relies on a fundamental property of basic feasible solutions in linear programming theory.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.299
Teacher spread0.274 · 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