MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922654736 · doi:10.23638/dmtcs-22-1-3

A Characterization of Morphic Words with Polynomial Growth

2020· preprint· en· W2922654736 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZigzagMultilinear mapWord (group theory)MorphismMathematicsString (physics)CombinatoricsCharacterization (materials science)PolynomialType (biology)Discrete mathematicsPure mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A morphic word is obtained by iterating a morphism to generate an infinite word, and then applying a coding. We characterize morphic words with polynomial growth in terms of a new type of infinite word called a $\textit{zigzag word}$. A zigzag word is represented by an initial string, followed by a finite list of terms, each of which repeats for each $n \geq 1$ in one of three ways: it grows forward [$t(1)\ t(2)\ \dotsm\ t(n)]$, backward [$t(n)\ \dotsm\ t(2)\ t(1)$], or just occurs once [$t$]. Each term can recursively contain subterms with their own forward and backward repetitions. We show that an infinite word is morphic with growth $\Theta(n^k)$ iff it is a zigzag word of depth $k$. As corollaries, we obtain that the morphic words with growth $O(n)$ are exactly the ultimately periodic words, and the morphic words with growth $O(n^2)$ are exactly the multilinear words.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer ScienceSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207