MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2509252776 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2015-073-7

An Existence Theory for Incomplete Designs

2015· article· en· W2509252776 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCalifornia Institute of Technology
KeywordsMathematicsPairwise comparisonBlock (permutation group theory)CombinatoricsCongruence (geometry)Block designDiscrete mathematicsPure mathematicsGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An incomplete pairwise balanced design is equivalent to a pairwise balanced design with a distinguished block, viewed as a ‘hole’. If there are v points, a hole of size w, and all (other) block sizes equal k, this is denoted IPBD((v;w), k). In addition to congruence restrictions on v and w, there is also a necessary inequality: v > (k − 1)w. This article establishes two main existence results for IPBD((v;w), k): one in which w is fixed and v is large, and the other in the case v > (k −1+∊)w when w is large (depending on ∊). Several possible generalizations of the problemare also discussed.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.015

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 head0.466
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.015 · 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