Bipartite grammar-based representations of large sparse binary matrices: Framework and transforms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce a new concept called context-free bipartite grammar (CFBG) and present a framework wherein large sparse binary matrices can be compactly represented by CFBGs. Similar to the traditional concept of context-free grammar (CFG), a CFBG consists of a set of production rules. Unlike CFGs, however, the right member of each production rule in a CFBG is a labeled bipartite graph with each edge labeled either as a variable or terminal symbol. Given a CFBG, start with its initial variable and repeatedly expand each variable labeled edge by first deleting that edge and then inserting in some manner all edges contained in the right member of that variable. The CFBG is admissible if the edge expansion process leads to a unique bipartite graph containing only terminal symbol labeled edges, in which case the CFBG is said to represent the matrix equal to the biadjacency matrix of the unique graph. Two bipartite grammar transforms, a sequential D-neighborhood pairing transform and an iterative pairing transform (IPT), are further presented to convert any binary matrix into a CFBG representing it. Experiments show that compared with popular sparse matrix storage methods such as compressed row storage and quadtree, CFBGs obtained by IPT can reduce the storage of sparse matrices significantly (by a factor of as much as 68).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it