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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the learnability of symbolic finite state automata (SFA), a model shown useful in many applications in software verification. The state-of-the-art literature on this topic follows the query learning paradigm, and so far all obtained results are positive. We provide a necessary condition for efficient learnability of SFAs in this paradigm, from which we obtain the first negative result. The main focus of our work lies in the learnability of SFAs under the paradigm of identification in the limit using polynomial time and data, and its strengthening efficient identifiability, which are concerned with the existence of a systematic set of characteristic samples from which a learner can correctly infer the target language. We provide a necessary condition for identification of SFAs in the limit using polynomial time and data, and a sufficient condition for efficient learnability of SFAs. From these conditions we derive a positive and a negative result. The performance of a learning algorithm is typically bounded as a function of the size of the representation of the target language. Since SFAs, in general, do not have a canonical form, and there are trade-offs between the complexity of the predicates on the transitions and the number of transitions, we start by defining size measures for SFAs. We revisit the complexity of procedures on SFAs and analyze them according to these measures, paying attention to the special forms of SFAs: normalized SFAs and neat SFAs, as well as to SFAs over a monotonic effective Boolean algebra. This is an extended version of the paper with the same title published in CSL'22.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it