MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036019187 · doi:10.1109/tit.2020.3002993

Vanishing Flats: A Combinatorial Viewpoint on the Planarity of Functions and Their Application

2020· article· en· W3036019187 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuxing Li, Wilfried Meidl, Alexandr Polujan, Alexander Pott, Constanza Riera, Pantelimon Stănică

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsPlanarity testingComputer scienceMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceCombinatoricsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a function $f$ from $\mathbb {F}_{2}^{n}$ to $\mathbb {F}_{2}^{n}$ , the planarity of $f$ is usually measured by its differential uniformity and differential spectrum. In this paper, we propose the concept of vanishing flats, which supplies a combinatorial viewpoint on the planarity. First, the number of vanishing flats of $f$ can be regarded as a measure of the distance between $f$ and the set of almost perfect nonlinear functions. In some cases, the number of vanishing flats serves as an “intermediate” concept between differential uniformity and differential spectrum, which contains more information than differential uniformity, however less than the differential spectrum. Secondly, the set of vanishing flats forms a combinatorial configuration called partial quadruple system, since it conveys a detailed structural information about $f$ . We initiate this study by considering the number of vanishing flats and the partial quadruple systems associated with monomials and Dembowski-Ostrom polynomials. In addition, we present an application of vanishing flats to the partition of a vector space into disjoint equidimensional affine spaces. We conclude the paper with several further questions and challenges.

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)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207