MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802872846 · doi:10.1142/s0129054120420010

Regular Expressions and Transducers Over Alphabet-Invariant and User-Defined Labels

2020· article· en· W2802872846 on OpenAlexaff
Stavros Konstantinidis, Nelma Moreira, Rogério Reis, Joshua Young

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegular languageRegular expressionInvariant (physics)AutomatonAlphabetString (physics)PrefixDecision problemDiscrete mathematicsFormal languageMathematicsGraphPredicate (mathematical logic)Word (group theory)DecidabilityComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are interested in regular expressions and transducers that represent word relations in an alphabet-invariant way — for example, the set of all word pairs [Formula: see text] where [Formula: see text] is a prefix of [Formula: see text] independently of what the alphabet is. Current software systems of formal language objects do not have a mechanism to define such objects. We define transducers in which transition labels involve what we call set specifications, some of which are alphabet invariant. In fact, we give a more broad definition of automata-type objects, called labelled graphs, where each transition label can be any string, as long as that string represents a subset of a certain monoid. Then, the behavior of the labelled graph is a subset of that monoid. We do the same for regular expressions. We obtain extensions of a few classic algorithmic constructions on ordinary regular expressions and transducers at the broad level of labelled graphs and in such a way that the computational efficiency of the extended constructions is not sacrificed. For transducers with set specs we obtain further algorithms that can be applied to questions about independent regular languages as well as a decision question about synchronous transducers.

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)0.005
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.013
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207