MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W347217945 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511760860

Noncommutative Rational Series with Applications

2010· preprint· en· W347217945 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Berstel, Christophe Reutenauer

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoncommutative geometryAlgebra over a fieldSeries (stratigraphy)Power seriesComputer scienceAlgebraic theoryAutomatonRepresentation (politics)Commutative propertyAlgebraic numberMathematicsTheoretical computer sciencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The algebraic theory of automata was created by Schützenberger and Chomsky over 50 years ago and there has since been a great deal of development. Classical work on the theory to noncommutative power series has been augmented more recently to areas such as representation theory, combinatorial mathematics and theoretical computer science. This book presents to an audience of graduate students and researchers a modern account of the subject and its applications. The algebraic approach allows the theory to be developed in a general form of wide applicability. For example, number-theoretic results can now be more fully explored, in addition to applications in automata theory, codes and non-commutative algebra. Much material, for example, Schützenberger's theorem on polynomially bounded rational series, appears here for the first time in book form. This is an excellent resource and reference for all those working in algebra, theoretical computer science and their areas of overlap.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations200
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicsemigroups and automata theoryFrench-language works237,207