MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951036665 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1501.06841

A Canonical Form for Weighted Automata and Applications to Approximate Minimization

2015· preprint· en· W2951036665 on OpenAlexaff
Borja Balle, Prakash Panangaden, Doina Precup

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSeries (stratigraphy)Singular value decompositionCanonical formAutomatonHankel matrixQuantum finite automataRational functionFinite-state machineProbabilistic automatonAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsAutomata theoryComputer sciencePure mathematicsTheoretical computer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of constructing approximations to a weighted automaton. Weighted finite automata (WFA) are closely related to the theory of rational series. A rational series is a function from strings to real numbers that can be computed by a finite WFA. Among others, this includes probability distributions generated by hidden Markov models and probabilistic automata. The relationship between rational series and WFA is analogous to the relationship between regular languages and ordinary automata. Associated with such rational series are infinite matrices called Hankel matrices which play a fundamental role in the theory of minimal WFA. Our contributions are: (1) an effective procedure for computing the singular value decomposition (SVD) of such infinite Hankel matrices based on their representation in terms of finite WFA; (2) a new canonical form for finite WFA based on this SVD decomposition; and, (3) an algorithm to construct approximate minimizations of a given WFA. The goal of our approximate minimization algorithm is to start from a minimal WFA and produce a smaller WFA that is close to the given one in a certain sense. The desired size of the approximating automaton is given as input. We give bounds describing how well the approximation emulates the behavior of the original WFA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.165 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207