MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964152270

Algorithms to Compute the Lyndon Array.

2016· article· en· W2964152270 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMurdoch Research Repository (Murdoch University) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuffix arrayCompressed suffix arrayComputationComputer scienceSuffixAlgorithmTime complexityConjectureQuadratic equationInverseData structureTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsSuffix tree
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We first describe three algorithms for computing the Lyndon array that have been suggested in the literature, but for which no structured exposition has been given. Two of these algorithms execute in quadratic time in the worst case, the third achieves linear time, but at the expense of prior computation of both the suffix array and the inverse suffix array of x. We then go on to describe two variants of a new algorithm that avoids prior computation of global data structures and executes in worst-case n log n time. Experimental evidence suggests that all but one of these five algorithms require only linear execution time in practice, with the two new algorithms faster by a small factor. We conjecture that there exists a fast and worst-case linear-time algorithm to compute the Lyndon array that is also elementary (making no use of global data structures such as the suffix array).

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.242 · 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