MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910976537 · doi:10.2478/rmm-2018-0007

Reflections on the <i>n</i> + <i>k</i> dragon kings problem

2018· article· en· W2910976537 on OpenAlex
Doug Chatham

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueRecreational mathematics magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagonalCombinatoricsRotation (mathematics)MathematicsTriple systemSquare (algebra)JumpQuarter (Canadian coin)PhysicsGeometryHistoryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A dragon king is a shogi piece that moves any number of squares vertically or horizontally or one square diagonally but does not move through or jump over other pieces. We construct infinite families of solutions to the n + k dragon kings problem of placing k pawns and n + k mutually nonattacking dragon kings on an n × n board, including solutions symmetric with respect to quarter-turn or half-turn rotations, solutions symmetric with respect to one or two diagonal reections, and solutions not symmetric with respect to any nontrivial rotation or reection. We show that an n + k dragon kings solution exists whenever n &gt; k + 5 and that, given some extra conditions, symmetric solutions exist for n &gt; 2k + 5 .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.264 · 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