MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230636836 · doi:10.1002/rsa.20234

Multiple choice tries and distributed hash tables

2008· article· en· W4230636836 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

VenueRandom Structures and Algorithms · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsString (physics)MathematicsConstant (computer programming)Hash functionCombinatoricsBounded functionPerfect hash functionBinary logarithmHash tableReduction (mathematics)Discrete mathematicsTrieSimple (philosophy)ComputationRandomized algorithmOnline algorithmAsymptotically optimal algorithmData structureComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article we consider tries built from n strings such that each string can be chosen from a pool of k strings, each of them generated by a discrete i.i.d. source. Three cases are considered: k = 2, k is large but fixed, and k ˜ c log n . The goal in each case is to obtain tries as balanced as possible. Various parameters such as height and fill‐up level are analyzed. It is shown that for two‐choice tries a 50% reduction in height is achieved when compared with ordinary tries. In a greedy online construction when the string that minimizes the depth of insertion for every pair is inserted, the height is only reduced by 25 % . To further reduce the height by another 25 % , we design a more refined online algorithm. The total computation time of the algorithm is O ( n log n ). Furthermore, when we choose the best among k ≥ 2 strings, then for large but fixed k the height is asymptotically equal to the typical depth in a trie. Finally, we show that further improvement can be achieved if the number of choices for each string is proportional to log n . In this case highly balanced trees can be constructed by a simple greedy algorithm for which the difference between the height and the fill‐up level is bounded by a constant with high probability. This, in turn, has implications for distributed hash tables, leading to a randomized ID management algorithm in peer‐to‐peer networks such that, with high probability, the ratio between the maximum and the minimum load of a processor is O(1). © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Random Struct. Alg., 2009

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.214 · 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