MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997558551 · doi:10.1051/ita/2020006

The weak circular repetition threshold over large alphabets

2020· preprint· en· W2997558551 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRAIRO - Theoretical Informatics and Applications · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConjectureRepetition (rhetorical device)PhysicsCombinatoricsInfimum and supremumMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The repetition threshold for words on n letters, denoted RT( n ), is the infimum of the set of all r such that there are arbitrarily long r -free words over n letters. A repetition threshold for circular words on n letters can be defined in three natural ways, which gives rise to the weak , intermediate , and strong circular repetition thresholds for n letters, denoted CRT W ( n ), CRT I ( n ), and CRT S ( n ), respectively. Currie and the present authors conjectured that CRT I ( n ) = CRT W ( n ) = RT( n ) for all n ≥ 4. We prove that CRT W ( n ) = RT( n ) for all n ≥ 45, which confirms a weak version of this conjecture for all but finitely many values of n .

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.240 · 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