MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399830315 · doi:10.4204/eptcs.403.28

Perfectly Clustering Words and Iterated Palindromes over a Ternary Alphabet

2024· article· en· W4399830315 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

VenueElectronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
Topicsemigroups and automata theory
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalindromeAlphabetTernary operationIterated functionCombinatoricsCluster analysisMathematicsWord (group theory)Computer scienceBiologyGeneticsLinguisticsStatisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, a new characterization of Lyndon words that are also perfectly clustering was proposed by Lapointe and Reutenauer (2024). A word over a ternary alphabet {a,b,c} is called perfectly clustering Lyndon if and only if it is the product of two palindromes and it can be written as apbqc where p and q are palindromes. We study the properties of palindromes appearing as factors p and q and their links with iterated palindromes over a ternary alphabet.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.228 · 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