Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1705.00211

Two Algorithms for Deciding Coincidence In Double Temporal Recurrence of Eventuality Sequences

Babatunde Opeoluwa Akinkunmi·Adesoji A. Adegbola
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Let two sequences of eventualities x (signifying the sequence, x0,x1, x2,...,xn-1) and y (signifying the sequence, y0, y1, y2,..,yn-1) both recur over the same time interval and it is required to determine whether or not a subinterval exists within the said interval which is a common subinterval of the intervals of occurrence of xp and yq. This paper presents two algorithms for solving the problem. the first explores an arbitrary cycle of the double recurrence for the existence of such an interval. its worst case running time is quadratic. The other algorithm is based on the novel notion of gcd-partitions and has a linear worst case running time. If the eventuality sequence pair (W,z) is a gcd-partition for the double recurrence (x, y),then, from a certain property of gcd-partitions, within any cycle of the double recurrence, there exists r and s such that intervals of occurrence of xp and yq are non-disjoint with the interval of co-occurrence of wr and zs. As such, a coincidence between xp and yq occurs within a cycle of the double recurrence if and only if such r and s exist so that the interval of co-occurrence of wr and zs shares a common interval with the common interval of occurrences of xp and yq. The algorithm systematically reduces the number of wr and zs pairs to be explored in the process of finding the existence of the coincidence.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Babatunde Opeoluwa Akinkunmi, Adesoji A. Adegbola. 2017-04-29. Two Algorithms for Deciding Coincidence In Double Temporal Recurrence of Eventuality Sequences. https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.00211

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗