MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102815313

Normal factor graphs: a diagrammatic approach to linear algebra

2016· preprint· en· W3102815313 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Al-Bashabsheh, Yongyi Mao, Pascal O. Vontobel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagrammatic reasoningPfaffianLinear algebraFactor (programming language)Algebra over a fieldSimple (philosophy)ConjectureComputer scienceLink (geometry)Encoding (memory)Theoretical computer scienceMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsPure mathematicsArtificial intelligenceProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspired by some new advances on normal factor graphs (NFGs), we introduce NFGs as a simple and intuitive diagrammatic approach towards encoding some concepts from linear algebra. We illustrate with examples the workings of such an approach and settle a conjecture of Peterson on the Pfaffian.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207