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
Let $\mathcal D$ be a collection of $D$ documents, which are strings over an alphabet of size $\sigma$, of total length $n$. We describe a data structure that uses linear space and reports $k$ most relevant documents that contain a query pattern $P$, which is a string of length $p$ packed in $p/\log_\sigma n$ words, in time $O(p/\log_\sigma n+k)$. This is optimal in the RAM model in the general case where $\log D = \Theta(\log n)$, and involves a novel RAM-optimal suffix tree search. Our construction supports an ample set of important relevance measures, such as the number of times $P$ appears in a document (called term frequency), a fixed document importance, and the minimal distance between two occurrences of $P$ in a document. When $\log D = o(\log n)$, we show how to reduce the space of the data structure from $O(n\log n)$ to $O(n(\log\sigma+\log D+\log\log n))$ bits, and to $O(n(\log\sigma+\log D))$ bits in the case of the popular term frequency measure of relevance, at the price of an additive term $O(\log^\varepsilon_\sigma n)$ in the query time, for any constant $\varepsilon>0$. We also consider the dynamic scenario, where documents can be inserted and deleted from the collection. We obtain linear space and query time $O(p(\log\log n)^2/\log_\sigma n+\log n + k\log\log k)$, whereas insertions and deletions require $O(\log^{1+\varepsilon} n)$ time per symbol, for any constant $\varepsilon>0$. Finally, we consider an extended static scenario where an extra parameter $\mathtt{par}(P,d)$ is defined, and the query must retrieve only documents $d$ such that $\mathtt{par}(P,d)\in [\tau_1,\tau_2]$, where this range is specified at query time. We solve these queries using linear space and $O(p/\log_\sigma n + \log^{1+\varepsilon} n + k\log^\varepsilon n)$ time, for any constant $\varepsilon>0$. Our technique is to translate these top-$k$ problems into multidimensional geometric search problems. As a bonus, we describe some improvements to those problems.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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