MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783084218 · doi:10.4230/lipics.isaac.2017.30

Succinct Color Searching in One Dimension

2017· article· en· W2783084218 on OpenAlexafffund
Hicham El-Zein, J. Ian Munro, Yakov Nekrich

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCombinatoricsDimension (graph theory)Set (abstract data type)OmegaInterval (graph theory)Rank (graph theory)Space (punctuation)Integer (computer science)MathematicsBinary logarithmDiscrete mathematicsPoint (geometry)Computer sciencePhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we study succinct data structures for one-dimensional color reporting and color counting problems. We are given a set of n points with integer coordinates in the range [1,m] and every point is assigned a color from the set {1,...\sigma}. A color reporting query asks for the list of distinct colors that occur in a query interval [a,b] and a color counting query asks for the number of distinct colors in [a,b]. We describe a succinct data structure that answers approximate color counting queries in O(1) time and uses \mathcal{B}(n,m) + O(n) + o(\mathcal{B}(n,m)) bits, where \mathcal{B}(n,m) is the minimum number of bits required to represent an arbitrary set of size n from a universe of m elements. Thus we show, somewhat counterintuitively, that it is not necessary to store colors of points in order to answer approximate color counting queries. In the special case when points are in the rank space (i.e., when n=m), our data structure needs only O(n) bits. Also, we show that \Omega(n) bits are necessary in that case. Then we turn to succinct data structures for color reporting. We describe a data structure that uses \mathcal{B}(n,m) + nH_d(S) + o(\mathcal{B}(n,m)) + o(n\lg\sigma) bits and answers queries in O(k+1) time, where k is the number of colors in the answer, and nH_d(S) (d=\log_\sigma n) is the d-th order empirical entropy of the color sequence. Finally, we consider succinct color reporting under restricted updates. Our dynamic data structure uses nH_d(S)+o(n\lg\sigma) bits and supports queries in O(k+1) time.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.014
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207