MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W50198451

Declarative programming of search problems with built-in arithmetic

2009· article· en· W50198451 on OpenAlexaff
Eugenia Ternovska, David G. M. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArithmetic functionNatural numberProgramming languageClass (philosophy)Declarative programmingExtension (predicate logic)Theoretical computer scienceAggregate (composite)Domain (mathematical analysis)Set (abstract data type)Expressive powerFinite setArithmeticMathematicsProgramming paradigmDiscrete mathematicsInductive programmingArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We address the problem of providing a logical formalization of arith-metic in declarative modelling languages for NP search problems. The challenge is to simultaneously allow quantification over an infinite domain such as the nat-ural numbers, provide naturally modelling facilities, and limit expressive power of the language. To address the problem, we introduce an extension of the model expansion (MX) based framework to finite structures embedded in an infinite secondary structure, together with “double-guarded ” logics for representing MX specifications for these structures. The logics also contain multi-set functions (ag-gregate operations). Our main result is that these logics, capture the complexity class NP on “small-cost ” arithmetical structures. We also give a grounding algo-rithm for specifications in the logic. 1

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.268
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeFrench-language works237,207