MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977712778 · doi:10.1007/s00453-020-00752-0

Building a Nest by an Automaton

2020· article· en· W2977712778 on OpenAlexafffund
Jurek Czyzowicz, Dariusz Dereniowski, Andrzej Pelc

Bibliographic record

VenueAlgorithmica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNarodowe Centrum NaukiNarodowym Centrum NaukiUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
KeywordsAlgorithmComputer scienceTree (set theory)RobotGeometryArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A robot modeled as a deterministic finite automaton has to build a structure from material available to it. The robot navigates in the infinite oriented grid $${\mathbb {Z}} \times {\mathbb {Z}}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>Z</mml:mi> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mi>Z</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> . Some cells of the grid are full (contain a brick) and others are empty. The subgraph of the grid induced by full cells, called the shape , is initially connected. The (Manhattan) distance between the furthest cells of the shape is called its span . The robot starts at a full cell. It can carry at most one brick at a time. At each step it can pick a brick from a full cell, move to an adjacent cell and drop a brick at an empty cell. The aim of the robot is to construct the most compact possible structure composed of all bricks, i.e., a nest . That is, the robot has to move all bricks in such a way that the span of the resulting shape be the smallest. Our main result is the design of a deterministic finite automaton that accomplishes this task and subsequently stops, for every initially connected shape, in time $$O(sn)$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>s</mml:mi> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> , where s is the span of the initial shape and $$n$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> </mml:math> is the number of bricks. We show that this complexity is optimal.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlgorithmicaSame topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207