MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202223927 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.12736

Hardness of Graph-Structured Algebraic and Symbolic Problems

2021· preprint· en· W3202223927 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite fieldMathematicsCombinatoricsAlgebraic numberDiscrete mathematicsDiagonalLaplacian matrixCoefficient matrixPolynomial ringPolynomialMatrix (chemical analysis)GraphRing (chemistry)Field (mathematics)Pure mathematicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the hardness of solving graph-structured linear systems with coefficients over a finite field $\mathbb{Z}_p$ and over a polynomial ring $\mathbb{F}[x_1,\ldots,x_t]$. We reduce solving general linear systems in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ to solving unit-weight low-degree graph Laplacians over $\mathbb{Z}_p$ with a polylogarithmic overhead on the number of non-zeros. Given the hardness of solving general linear systems in $\mathbb{Z}_p$ [Casacuberta-Kyng 2022], this result shows that it is unlikely that we can generalize Laplacian solvers over $\mathbb{R}$, or finite-element based methods over $\mathbb{R}$ in general, to a finite-field setting. We also reduce solving general linear systems over $\mathbb{Z}_p$ to solving linear systems whose coefficient matrices are walk matrices (matrices with all ones on the diagonal) and normalized Laplacians (Laplacians that are also walk matrices) over $\mathbb{Z}_p$. We often need to apply linear system solvers to random linear systems, in which case the worst case analysis above might be less relevant. For example, we often need to substitute variables in a symbolic matrix with random values. Here, a symbolic matrix is simply a matrix whose entries are in a polynomial ring $\mathbb{F}[x_1, \ldots, x_t]$. We formally define the reducibility between symbolic matrix classes, which are classified in terms of the degrees of the entries and the number of occurrences of the variables. We show that the determinant identity testing problem for symbolic matrices with polynomial degree $1$ and variable multiplicity at most $3$ is at least as hard as the same problem for general matrices over $\mathbb{R}$.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.117 · 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