Data structures for computing unique palindromes in static and non-static strings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A palindromic substring T[i.. j] of a string T is said to be a shortest unique palindromic substring (SUPS) in T for an interval [p, q] if T [i.. j] is a shortest one such that T [i.. j] occurs only once in T, and [i, j] contains [p, q]. The SUPS problem is, given a string T of length n, to construct a data structure that can compute all the SUPSs for any given query interval. It is known that any SUPS query can be answered in O(α) time after O(n)-time preprocessing, where α is the number of SUPSs to output [Inoue et al., 2018]. In this paper, we first show that α is at most 4, and the upper bound is tight. We also show that the total sum of lengths of minimal unique substrings of string T, which is strongly related to SUPSs, is O(n). Then, we present the first O(n)-bits data structures that can answer any SUPS query in constant time. Also, we present an algorithm to solve the SUPS problem for a sliding window that can answer any query in O(log log W) time and update data structures in amortized O(log σ) time, where W is the size of the window, and σ is the alphabet size. Furthermore, we consider the SUPS problem in the after-edit model and present an efficient algorithm. Namely, we present an algorithm that uses O(n) time for preprocessing and answers any k SUPS queries in O(log n log log n + k log log n) time after single character substitution. Finally, as a by-product, we propose a fully-dynamic data structure for range minimum queries (RmQs) with a constraint where the width of each query range is limited to poly-logarithmic. The constrained RmQ data structure can answer such a query in constant time and support a single-element edit operation in amortized constant time.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".