MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393042598 · doi:10.1145/3652025

Fast Multivariate Multipoint Evaluation over All Finite Fields

2024· article· en· W4393042598 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

VenueJournal of the ACM · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersIndian Institute of Technology BombayDepartment of Atomic Energy, Government of India
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsComputer scienceMultivariate analysisAlgorithmMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate multipoint evaluation is the problem of evaluating a multivariate polynomial, given as a coefficient vector, simultaneously at multiple evaluation points. In this work, we show that there exists a deterministic algorithm for multivariate multipoint evaluation over any finite field \(\mathbb {F}\) that outputs the evaluations of an m -variate polynomial of degree less than d in each variable at N points in time, \(\begin{equation*} (d^m+N)^{1+o(1)}\cdot {{\sf poly}}(m,d,\log |\mathbb {F}|), \end{equation*}\) for all \(m\in \mathbb {N}\) and all sufficiently large \(d\in \mathbb {N}\) . A previous work of Kedlaya and Umans (FOCS 2008 and SICOMP 2011) achieved the same time complexity when the number of variables m is at most \(d^{o(1)}\) and had left the problem of removing this condition as an open problem. A recent work of Bhargava, Ghosh, Kumar, and Mohapatra (STOC 2022) answered this question when the underlying field is not too large and has characteristic less than \(d^{o(1)}\) . In this work, we remove this constraint on the number of variables over all finite fields, thereby answering the question of Kedlaya and Umans over all finite fields. Our algorithm relies on a non-trivial combination of ideas from three seemingly different previously known algorithms for multivariate multipoint evaluation, namely the algorithms of Kedlaya and Umans, that of Björklund, Kaski, and Williams (IPEC 2017 and Algorithmica 2019), and that of Bhargava, Ghosh, Kumar, and Mohapatra, together with a result of Bombieri and Vinogradov from analytic number theory about the distribution of primes in an arithmetic progression. We also present a second algorithm for multivariate multipoint evaluation that is completely elementary and, in particular, avoids the use of the Bombieri–Vinogradov theorem. However, it requires a mild assumption that the field size is bounded by an exponential tower in d of bounded height . More specifically, our second algorithm solves the multivariate multipoint evaluation problem over a finite field \(\mathbb {F}\) in time, \(\begin{equation*} (d^m+N)^{1+o(1)}\cdot {{\sf poly}}(m,d,\log |\mathbb {F}|), \end{equation*}\) for all \(m\in \mathbb {N}\) and all sufficiently large \(d\in \mathbb {N}\) , provided that the size of the finite field \(\mathbb {F}\) is at most \((\exp (\exp (\exp (\cdots (\exp (d)))))\) , where the height of this tower of exponentials is fixed.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.293 · 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