MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028589106 · doi:10.1142/s0129054121410094

An Inequality for the Number of Periods in a Word

2021· preprint· en· W3028589106 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Gabrić, Narad Rampersad, Jeffrey Shallit

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWord (group theory)MathematicsPrefixSquare-free integerInequalityExponentRepresentation (politics)Discrete mathematicsPure mathematicsCombinatoricsMathematical analysisLinguisticsGeometryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove an inequality for the number of periods in a word [Formula: see text] in terms of the length of [Formula: see text] and its initial critical exponent. Next, we characterize all periods of the length-[Formula: see text] prefix of a characteristic Sturmian word in terms of the lazy Ostrowski representation of [Formula: see text], and use this result to show that our inequality is tight for infinitely many words [Formula: see text]. We propose two related measures of periodicity for infinite words. Finally, we also consider special cases where [Formula: see text] is overlap-free or squarefree.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
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 score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0070.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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