MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416353551 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.12039

Positive Characteristic Sets for Relational Pattern Languages

2025· preprint· W4416353551 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Machine Intelligence InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsRelevance (law)Context (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Class (philosophy)Word (group theory)String (physics)Statistical relational learningRelational database

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of learning formal languages, data about an unknown target language L is given in terms of a set of (word,label) pairs, where a binary label indicates whether or not the given word belongs to L. A (polynomial-size) characteristic set for L, with respect to a reference class L of languages, is a set of such pairs that satisfies certain conditions allowing a learning algorithm to (efficiently) identify L within L. In this paper, we introduce the notion of positive characteristic set, referring to characteristic sets of only positive examples. These are of importance in the context of learning from positive examples only. We study this notion for classes of relational pattern languages, which are of relevance to various applications in string processing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.315
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