MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951800195 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1005.5142

Unprovability of the Logical Characterization of Bisimulation

2010· preprint· en· W2951800195 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pedro Sánchez Terraf

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacterization (materials science)BisimulationCounterexampleMarkov chainMarkov processSet (abstract data type)MathematicsState (computer science)Discrete mathematicsEvent (particle physics)Computer scienceTheoretical computer sciencePure mathematicsAlgorithmProgramming languageStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We quickly review labelled Markov processes (LMP) and provide a counterexample showing that in general measurable spaces, event bisimilarity and state bisimilarity differ in LMP. This shows that the logic in Desharnais [*] does not characterize state bisimulation in non-analytic measurable spaces. Furthermore we show that, under current foundations of Mathematics, such logical characterization is unprovable for spaces that are projections of a coanalytic set. Underlying this construction there is a proof that stationary Markov processes over general measurable spaces do not have semi-pullbacks. ([*] J. Desharnais, Labelled Markov Processes. School of Computer Science. McGill University, Montréal (1999))

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.114 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207