MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951958096 · doi:10.1142/s0129054120410075

The Intersection Problem for Finite Semigroups

2020· preprint· en· W2951958096 on OpenAlexaff
Lukas Fleischer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsDecidabilitySpecial classes of semigroupsIntersection (aeronautics)MathematicsCommutative propertySemigroupComplexity classMonoidBounded functionClass (philosophy)Word problem (mathematics education)Discrete mathematicsMorphismOrder (exchange)Krohn–Rhodes theoryPure mathematicsTime complexityComputer scienceArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The intersection problem for finite semigroups asks, given a set of regular languages, represented by recognizing morphisms to finite semigroups, whether there exists a word contained in their intersection. In previous work, it was shown that is problem is [Formula: see text]-complete. We introduce compressibility measures as a useful tool to classify the complexity of the intersection problem for certain classes of finite semigroups. Using this framework, we obtain a new and simple proof that for groups and for commutative semigroups, the problem (as well as the variant where the languages are represented by finite automata) is contained in [Formula: see text]. We uncover certain structural and non-structural properties determining the complexity of the intersection problem for varieties of semigroups containing only trivial submonoids. More specifically, we prove [Formula: see text]-hardness for classes of semigroups having a property called unbounded order and for the class of all nilpotent semigroups of bounded order. On the contrary, we show that bounded order and commutativity imply decidability in poly-logarithmic time on alternating random-access Turing machines with a single alternation. We also establish connections to the monoid variant of the problem.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0080.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207