Regular Expressions and Transducers Over Alphabet-Invariant and User-Defined Labels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".