MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387579616 · doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2023.106452

Ranking and unranking bordered and unbordered words

2023· article· en· W4387579616 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Processing Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersUniversity of Winnipeg
KeywordsSuffixPrefixWord (group theory)Rank (graph theory)Ranking (information retrieval)AlphabetCombinatoricsSpace (punctuation)MathematicsComputer scienceUnit (ring theory)ArithmeticArtificial intelligenceLinguisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A border of a word w is a word that is both a non-empty proper prefix and suffix of w . If w has a border, then it is said to be bordered ; otherwise, it is said to be unbordered . The main results of this paper are the first algorithms to rank and unrank length- n bordered and unbordered words over a k -letter alphabet. We show that, under the unit-cost RAM model, ranking bordered and unbordered words can be done in O ( k n 3 ) time using O ( n ) space, and unranking them can be done in O ( n 4 k log ⁡ k ) time using O ( n ) space.

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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

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 communication0.0010.004
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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