MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134377377 · doi:10.1145/3477910

A Simple Algorithm for Optimal Search Trees with Two-way Comparisons

2021· article· en· W3134377377 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

VenueACM Transactions on Algorithms · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHong Kong University of Science and TechnologyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)CorrectnessRunning timeAlgorithmTime complexityMathematicsOptimal binary search treeComputer scienceSearch algorithmSIMPLE algorithmSearch treeTheoretical computer scienceInterval tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a simple O(n 4 ) -time algorithm for computing optimal search trees with two-way comparisons. The only previous solution to this problem, by Anderson et al., has the same running time but is significantly more complicated and is restricted to the variant where only successful queries are allowed. Our algorithm extends directly to solve the standard full variant of the problem, which also allows unsuccessful queries and for which no polynomial-time algorithm was previously known. The correctness proof of our algorithm relies on a new structural theorem for two-way-comparison search trees.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.268 · 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