MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749856437 · doi:10.1002/jcd.21636

Linking systems of difference sets

2018· preprint· en· W2749856437 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Jedwab, Shuxing Li, Samuel Simon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Designs · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsAbelian groupConstructiveGroup (periodic table)Connection (principal bundle)Argument (complex analysis)Difference setSet (abstract data type)Projection (relational algebra)Pure mathematicsAlgebra over a fieldDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A linking system of difference sets is a collection of mutually related group difference sets, whose advantageous properties have been used to extend classical constructions of systems of linked symmetric designs. The central problems are to determine which groups contain a linking system of difference sets, and how large such a system can be. All previous constructive results for linking systems of difference sets are restricted to 2‐groups. We use an elementary projection argument to show that neither the McFarland/Dillon nor the Spence construction of difference sets can give rise to a linking system of difference sets in non‐2‐groups. We make a connection to Kerdock and bent sets, which provides large linking systems of difference sets in elementary abelian 2‐groups. We give a new construction for linking systems of difference sets in 2‐groups, taking advantage of a previously unrecognized connection with group difference matrices. This construction simplifies and extends prior results, producing larger linking systems than before in certain 2‐groups, new linking systems in other 2‐groups for which no system was previously known, and the first known examples in nonabelian groups.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial DesignsSame topicgraph theory and CDMA systemsFrench-language works237,207