MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1614173561 · doi:10.1287/moor.2014.0706

Euclidean Networks with a Backbone and a Limit Theorem for Minimum Spanning Caterpillars

2015· article· en· W1614173561 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Operations Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEuclidean minimum spanning treeSpanning treeMinimum spanning treeCombinatoricsEuclidean geometryMinimum weightDiscrete mathematicsShortest path problemSubadditivityEuclidean shortest pathLimit (mathematics)Shortest-path treeMinimum degree spanning treeGraphLongest path problemGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A caterpillar network (or graph) G is a tree with the property that removal of the leaf edges of G leaves one with a path. Here we focus on minimum weight spanning caterpillars where the vertices are points in the Euclidean plane and the costs of the path edges and the leaf edges are multiples of their corresponding Euclidean lengths. The flexibility in choosing the weight for path edges versus the weight for leaf edges gives some useful flexibility in modeling. In particular, one can accommodate problems motivated by communications theory such as the “last mile problem.” Geometric and probabilistic inequalities are developed that lead to a limit theorem that is analogous to the well-known Beardwood, Halton, and Hammersley theorem for the length of the shortest tour through a random sample, but the minimal spanning caterpillars fall outside the scope of the theory of subadditive Euclidean functionals.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.224 · 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