MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229633318 · doi:10.1017/s0021900200008056

Asymptotic Properties of a Leader Election Algorithm

2011· article· en· W4229633318 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ravi Kalpathy, Hosam M. Mahmoud, Mark Daniel Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacsGeorge Washington UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsConvergence (economics)LimitingMetric (unit)Metric spaceRandom variableDistribution (mathematics)Variance (accounting)Coin flippingAsymptotic distributionSpace (punctuation)Applied mathematicsAlgorithmCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsStatisticsMathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a serialized coin-tossing leader election algorithm that proceeds in rounds until a winner is chosen, or all contestants are eliminated. The analysis allows for either biased or fair coins. We find the exact distribution for the duration of any fixed contestant; asymptotically, it turns out to be a geometric distribution. Rice's method (an analytic technique) shows that the moments of the duration contain oscillations, which we give explicitly for the mean and variance. We also use convergence in the Wasserstein metric space to show that the distribution of the total number of coin flips (among all participants), suitably normalized, approaches a normal limiting random variable.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.167 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ProbabilitySame topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207