Density Maximizers of Layered Permutations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A permutation is layered if it contains neither $231$ nor $312$ as a pattern.It is known that, if $\sigma$ is a layered permutation, then the density of $\sigma$ in a permutation of order $n$ is maximized by a layered permutation. Albert, Atkinson, Handley, Holton and Stromquist [Electron. J. Combin. 9 (2002), #R5] claimed that the density of a layered permutation with layers of sizes $(a,1,b)$ where $a,b\geq2$ is asymptotically maximized by layered permutations with a bounded number of layers, and conjectured that the same holds if a layered permutation has no consecutive layers of size one and its first and last layers are of size at least two. We show that, if $\sigma$ is a layered permutation whose first layer is sufficiently large and second layer is of size one, then the number of layers tends to infinity in every sequence of layered permutations asymptotically maximizing the density of $\sigma$. This disproves the conjecture and the claim of Albert et al. We complement this result by giving sufficient conditions on a layered permutation to have asymptotic or exact maximizers with a bounded number of layers.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".