MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087695592 · doi:10.3390/a13090234

More Time-Space Tradeoffs for Finding a Shortest Unique Substring

2020· article· en· W3087695592 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

VenueAlgorithms · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAcademy of Finland
KeywordsSubstringCombinatoricsSublinear functionBinary logarithmMathematicsGeneralizationSpace (punctuation)Constant (computer programming)WorkspaceAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceData structureArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We extend recent results regarding finding shortest unique substrings (SUSs) to obtain new time-space tradeoffs for this problem and the generalization of finding k-mismatch SUSs. Our new results include the first algorithm for finding a k-mismatch SUS in sublinear space, which we obtain by extending an algorithm by Senanayaka (2019) and combining it with a result on sketching by Gawrychowski and Starikovskaya (2019). We first describe how, given a text T of length n and m words of workspace, with high probability we can find an SUS of length L in O(n(L/m)logL) time using random access to T, or in O(n(L/m)log2(L)loglogσ) time using O((L/m)log2L) sequential passes over T. We then describe how, for constant k, with high probability, we can find a k-mismatch SUS in O(n1+ϵL/m) time using O(nϵL/m) sequential passes over T, again using only m words of workspace. Finally, we also describe a deterministic algorithm that takes O(nτlogσlogn) time to find an SUS using O(n/τ) words of workspace, where τ is a parameter.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.231 · 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