The Subpower Membership Problem for Finite Algebras with Cube Terms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subalgebra membership problem is the problem of deciding if a given element belongs to an algebra given by a set of generators. This is one of the best established computational problems in algebra. We consider a variant of this problem, which is motivated by recent progress in the Constraint Satisfaction Problem, and is often referred to as the Subpower Membership Problem (SMP). In the SMP we are given a set of tuples in a direct product of algebras from a fixed finite set $\mathcal{K}$ of finite algebras, and are asked whether or not a given tuple belongs to the subalgebra of the direct product generated by a given set. Our main result is that the subpower membership problem SMP($\mathcal{K}$) is in P if $\mathcal{K}$ is a finite set of finite algebras with a cube term, provided $\mathcal{K}$ is contained in a residually small variety. We also prove that for any finite set of finite algebras $\mathcal{K}$ in a variety with a cube term, each one of the problems SMP($\mathcal{K}$), SMP($\mathbb{HS} \mathcal{K}$), and finding compact representations for subpowers in $\mathcal{K}$, is polynomial time reducible to any of the others, and the first two lie in NP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".