MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409348349 · doi:10.37236/13380

Fusions of the Tensor Product of a Strongly Regular Graph

2025· article· en· W4409348349 on OpenAlexafffund
Allen Herman, Neha Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFinite Group Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTensor productGraphComputer scienceMathematicsCombinatoricsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we determine all fusions of the association scheme $\mathcal{A} \otimes \mathcal{A}$, where $\mathcal{A}$ is the symmetric rank $3$ association scheme corresponding to a strongly regular graph. This includes both guaranteed fusions, which are fusions for all symmetric rank $3$ association schemes $\mathcal{A}$, and specific case fusions, which exist only under restrictions on the parameters of the association scheme. Along the sections we will determine the fusions of wreath products of strongly regular graphs and the fusions of the tensor square of a symmetric rank $3$ table algebra. This is an extension to the recent work of the authors and Meagher, where we solved the same problem for the generalized Hamming scheme $H(2,\mathcal{A})$ of the association scheme obtained from a strongly regular graph. The main results of this article prove that the families of strongly regular graphs for which $\mathcal{A} \otimes \mathcal{A}$ has a special case fusion are the same families for which $H(2,\mathcal{A})$ has a special case fusion; and that the imprimitive strongly regular graphs are the only family of strongly regular graphs for which the wreath product $\mathcal{A} \wr \mathcal{A}$ has a special case fusion.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicFinite Group Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207