MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383221855 · doi:10.1145/3597066.3597119

A New Black Box Factorization Algorithm - the Non-monic Case

2023· article· en· W4383221855 on OpenAlexaff
Tian Chen, Michael Monagan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSubroutineAlgorithmMonic polynomialFactorizationBlack boxRepresentation (politics)MaplePolynomialMathematicsArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a sparse polynomial represented by a black box, we aim to find its factors in the sparse representation. The authors have previously developed an efficient algorithm for the monic and square-free case. In this work, we contribute a new algorithm that also handles the non-monic, non-square-free and non-primitive cases. We give a worst case complexity analysis with failure probabilities. The required number of probes to the black box in our algorithm is much less than the previously best known algorithm by Rubinfeld and Zippel in 1994. We have also implemented our new algorithm in Maple with all major subroutines in C. Our benchmarks show that our algorithm is much faster than the current best determinant and factorization algorithms in Maple and Magma.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207