MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403876945 · doi:10.46298/lmcs-20(4:9)2024

Sum and Tensor of Quantitative Effects

2024· article· en· W4403876945 on OpenAlexafffund
Giorgio Bacci, Radu Mardare, Prakash Panangaden, Gordon Plotkin

Bibliographic record

VenueLogical Methods in Computer Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsMonad (category theory)Algebraic numberMathematicsAlgebra over a fieldTensor productDistributive propertyTensor (intrinsic definition)Algebraic theoryCategorical variableComputer sciencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspired by the seminal work of Hyland, Plotkin, and Power on the combination of algebraic computational effects via sum and tensor, we develop an analogous theory for the combination of quantitative algebraic effects. Quantitative algebraic effects are monadic computational effects on categories of metric spaces, which, moreover, have an algebraic presentation in the form of quantitative equational theories, a logical framework introduced by Mardare, Panangaden, and Plotkin that generalises equational logic to account for a concept of approximate equality. As our main result, we show that the sum and tensor of two quantitative equational theories correspond to the categorical sum (i.e., coproduct) and tensor, respectively, of their effects qua monads. We further give a theory of quantitative effect transformers based on these two operations, essentially providing quantitative analogues to the following monad transformers due to Moggi: exception, resumption, reader, and writer transformers. Finally, as an application, we provide the first quantitative algebraic axiomatizations to the following coalgebraic structures: Markov processes, labelled Markov processes, Mealy machines, and Markov decision processes, each endowed with their respective bisimilarity metrics. Apart from the intrinsic interest in these axiomatizations, it is pleasing they have been obtained as the composition, via sum and tensor, of simpler quantitative equational theories.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLogical Methods in Computer ScienceSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207