MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768551845 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v10n1p1

Probability to Compute Divisor of a Hidden Integer

2017· article· en· W2768551845 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Computational Techniques in Science and Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFoshan University
KeywordsInteger (computer science)MathematicsDivisor (algebraic geometry)Greatest common divisorRadical of an integerInterval (graph theory)Probabilistic logicDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsInteger sequencePrime factorFactorizationMultipleGaussian integerAlgorithmStatisticsArithmeticPrime (order theory)Computer scienceGenerating function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article makes an investigation on the probability of finding the greatest common divisor between a given integer and a hidden integer that lies in an integer interval. It shows that, adding the integers that are picked randomly in the interval results in a much bigger probability than subtracting the picked integers one with another. Propositions and theorems are proved and formulas to calculate the probabilities are presented in detail. The research is helpful in developing probabilistic algorithm of integer factorization.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.201 · 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