Sorting by Multi-Cut Rearrangements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A multi-cut rearrangement of a string S is a string S′ obtained from S by an operation called k-cut rearrangement, that consists of (1) cutting S at a given number k of places in S, making S the concatenated string X1·X2·X3·…·Xk·Xk+1, where X1 and Xk+1 are possibly empty, and (2) rearranging the Xis so as to obtain S′=Xπ(1)·Xπ(2)·Xπ(3)·…·Xπ(k+1), π being a permutation on 1,2,…,k+1 satisfying π(1)=1 and π(k+1)=k+1. Given two strings S and T built on the same multiset of characters from an alphabet Σ, the Sorting by Multi-Cut Rearrangements (SMCR) problem asks whether a given number ℓ of k-cut rearrangements suffices to transform S into T. The SMCR problem generalizes several classical genomic rearrangements problems, such as Sorting by Transpositions and Sorting by Block Interchanges. It may also model chromoanagenesis, a recently discovered phenomenon consisting of massive simultaneous rearrangements. In this paper, we study the SMCR problem from an algorithmic complexity viewpoint. More precisely, we investigate its classical and parameterized complexity, as well as its approximability, in the general case or when S and T are permutations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".