MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7144927423

疎な多変数多項式系の高速な変数消去法の探求 (Computer Algebra : Theory and its Applications)

2019· article· ja· W7144927423 on OpenAlexaff
Tateaki Sasaki, Daiju Inaba

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldComputer Science
TopicPolynomial and algebraic computation
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemainderPolynomialAlgebra over a fieldBasis (linear algebra)Ideal (ethics)Field (mathematics)Gröbner basisSquare-free polynomial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given {F_{1}, …, F_{m+1}}subset mathbb{K}[x, u]_{dot{t}} with mgeq 2, where mathbb{K} is a number field of characteristic 0_{:} (x) =(x_{1}, …, x_{m}) and (u) =(u_{1}, …, u_{n})_{dot{gamma}} we want to develop an efficient method of computing hat{S}(u) which is the smallest polynomial of the elimination ideal langle F_{1}, F_{m+1}ranglecap mathbb{K}[u]_{:} without computing the Gröbner basis but eliminating x with polynomial remainder sequences w.r. t. x. Our targets are sparse multivariate polynomials of many sub-variables u. Last year. we succeeded in finding such a method for {G, H}subset mathbb{K}[x, u]. The method is much more efficient than the Gröbner basis method when ngeq 3. In this paper, we attack the case of mgeq 2. Contrary to the conventional triangularization method which converts the initial system to {G_{1}(x_{1}, …, x_{m}, u), G_{2}(x_{2}, …, x_{m}, u), …, G_{m} (x_{m}, u), H(u)}_{dot{0}} our method computcs H_{1}(u), H_{l}(u). We will prove that each H_{i}(u)(iin{1, …, l}) is a multiple of hat{S}{dot{y} so we compute H :=gcd(H_{1}, …, H_{l}). H is a small multiple of hat{S}:H=overline{H}hat{S}. We propose a method of deleting "extraneous factor" overline{H}{backslash.} by factorizing H.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicPolynomial and algebraic computationFrench-language works237,207