Theory of supports for linear codes endowed with the sum-rank metric
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sum-rank metric naturally extends both the Hamming and rank metrics in coding theory over fields. It measures the error-correcting capability of codes in multishot matrix-multiplicative channels (e.g. linear network coding or the discrete memoryless channel on fields). Although this metric has already shown to be of interest in several applications, not much is known about it. In this work, sum-rank supports for codewords and linear codes are introduced and studied, with emphasis on duality. The lattice structure of sum-rank supports is given; characterizations of the ambient spaces (\textit{support spaces}) they define are obtained; the classical operations of restriction and shortening are extended to the sum-rank metric; and estimates (bounds and equalities) on the parameters of such restricted and shortened codes are found. Three main applications are given: 1) Generalized sum-rank weights are introduced, together with their basic properties and bounds; 2) It is shown that duals, shortened and restricted codes of maximum sum-rank distance (MSRD) codes are in turn MSRD; 3) Degenerateness and effective lengths of sum-rank codes are introduced and characterized. In an appendix, skew supports are introduced, defined by skew polynomials, and their connection to sum-rank supports is given.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".