MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963002110 · doi:10.1002/rsa.20740

Inside the clustering window for random linear equations

2017· article· en· W2963002110 on OpenAlexafffund
Pu Gao, Michael Molloy

Bibliographic record

VenueRandom Structures and Algorithms · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCluster analysisMathematicsStatistical physicsCluster (spacecraft)Partition (number theory)Random variableCombinatoricsPhysicsComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a random system of cn linear equations over n variables in GF(2), where each equation contains exactly r variables; this is equivalent to r ‐XORSAT. Previous work has established a clustering threshold, for this model: if for any constant then with high probability all solutions form a well‐connected cluster; whereas if , then with high probability the solutions partition into well‐connected, well‐separated clusters (with probability tending to 1 as ). This is part of a general clustering phenomenon which is hypothesized to arise in most of the commonly studied models of random constraint satisfaction problems, via sophisticated but mostly nonrigorous techniques from statistical physics. We extend that study to the range , and prove that the connectivity parameters of the r ‐XORSAT clusters undergo a smooth transition around the clustering threshold.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRandom Structures and AlgorithmsSame topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207