MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388579442 · doi:10.1515/spma-2023-0105

Legendre pairs of lengths<i>ℓ</i>≡ 0 (mod 5)

2023· article· en· W4388579442 on OpenAlexaff
Ilias Kotsireas, Christoph Koutschan, Dursun A. Bulutoglu, David M. Arquette, Jonathan Turner, Kenneth J. Ryan

Bibliographic record

VenueSpecial Matrices · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersAustrian Science FundU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsMathematicsConjectureCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract By assuming a type of balance for length <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mi>ℓ</m:mi><m:mo>=</m:mo><m:mn>87</m:mn></m:math> \ell =87 and nontrivial subgroups of multiplier groups of Legendre pairs (LPs) for length <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mi>ℓ</m:mi><m:mo>=</m:mo><m:mn>85</m:mn></m:math> \ell =85 , we find LPs of these lengths. We then study the power spectral density (PSD) values of <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mi>m</m:mi></m:math> m compressions of LPs of length <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mn>5</m:mn><m:mi>m</m:mi></m:math> 5m . We also formulate a conjecture for LPs of lengths <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mi>ℓ</m:mi><m:mo>≡</m:mo><m:mn>0</m:mn></m:math> \ell \equiv 0 (mod 5) and demonstrate how it can be used to decrease the search space and storage requirements for finding such LPs. The newly found LPs decrease the number of integers in the range <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><m:mo>≤</m:mo><m:mn>200</m:mn></m:math> \le 200 for which the existence question of LPs remains unsolved from 12 to 10.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpecial MatricesSame topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207