MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1627731299 · doi:10.1145/2746241

Sparse Sums of Positive Semidefinite Matrices

2015· article· en· W1627731299 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Algorithms · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlgebraic numberPositive-definite matrixGraphPreprocessorTime complexityEstimatorSpectral propertiesSatisfiability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many fast graph algorithms begin by preprocessing the graph to improve its sparsity. A common form of this is spectral sparsification, which involves removing and reweighting the edges of the graph while approximately preserving its spectral properties. This task has a more general linear algebraic formulation in terms of approximating sums of rank-one matrices. This article considers a more general task of approximating sums of symmetric, positive semidefinite matrices of arbitrary rank. We present two deterministic, polynomial time algorithms for solving this problem. The first algorithm applies the pessimistic estimators of Wigderson and Xiao, and the second involves an extension of the method of Batson, Spielman, and Srivastava. These algorithms have several applications, including sparsifiers of hypergraphs, sparse solutions to semidefinite programs, sparsifiers of unique games, and graph sparsifiers with various auxiliary constraints.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on AlgorithmsSame topicStochastic Gradient Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207