MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512882170 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0906.2924

Lower Bounds for Pinning Lines by Balls

2009· preprint· en· W1512882170 on OpenAlexaff
Otfried Cheong, Xavier Goaoc, Andreas F. Holmsen

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisjoint setsCombinatoricsTransversal (combinatorics)SubfamilyLine (geometry)Regular polygonMathematicsPairwise comparisonUnit (ring theory)Integer (computer science)Property (philosophy)Discrete mathematicsComputer scienceGeometryMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A line L is a transversal to a family F of convex objects in R^d if it intersects every member of F. In this paper we show that for every integer d>2 there exists a family of 2d-1 pairwise disjoint unit balls in R^d with the property that every subfamily of size 2d-2 admits a transversal, yet any line misses at least one member of the family. This answers a question of Danzer from 1957.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.017
Open science0.0080.010
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207