MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594425395 · doi:10.1145/3055282.3055299

Fermat benchmarks for rational expressionals in maple

2017· article· en· W2594425395 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

VenueACM communications in computer algebra · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMapleFermat's Last TheoremBenchmark (surveying)Set (abstract data type)UndoFactor (programming language)Computer scienceFermat numberMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematicsProgramming languagePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We employ two techniques to dramatically improve Maple's performance on the Fermat benchmarks for simplifying rational expressions. First, we factor expanded polynomials to ensure that gcds are identified and cancelled automatically. Second, we replace all expanded polynomials by new variables and normalize the result. To undo the substitutions, we use a C routine for sparse multivariate division by a set of polynomials. The resulting times for the first Fermat benchmark are a factor of 17x faster than Fermat and 39x faster than Magma.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.328 · 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