MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946907515 · doi:10.4230/lipics.itcs.2020.26

On Local Testability in the Non-Signaling Setting

2020· article· en· W2946907515 on OpenAlexafffund
Alessandro Chiesa, Peter Manohar, Igor Shinkar

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInterchain StiftungEthereum FoundationAchievement Rewards for College Scientists FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTestabilityComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-signaling strategies are a generalization of quantum strategies that have been studied in physics for decades, and have recently found applications in theoretical computer science. These applications motivate the study of local-to-global phenomena for non-signaling functions. We prove that low-degree testing in the non-signaling setting is possible, assuming that the locality of the non-signaling function exceeds a threshold. We additionally show that if the locality is below the threshold then the test fails spectacularly, in that there exists a non-signaling function which passes the test with probability 1 and yet is maximally far from being low-degree. Along the way, we present general results about the local testability of linear codes in the non-signaling setting. These include formulating natural definitions that capture the condition that a non-signaling function "belongs" to a given code, and characterizing the sets of local constraints that imply membership in the code. We prove these results by formulating a logical inference system for linear constraints on non-signaling functions that is complete and sound.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.015
Scholarly communication0.0050.014
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicExperimental Learning in EngineeringFrench-language works237,207