MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1801749230 · doi:10.37236/2497

Recognition and Characterization of Chronological Interval Digraphs

2013· article· en· W1801749230 on OpenAlexaff
Sandip Das, Mathew C. Francis, Pavol Hell, Jing Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsDigraphMathematicsInterval (graph theory)Characterization (materials science)Interval graphVertex (graph theory)Discrete mathematicsTime complexityGraphClass (philosophy)PathwidthLine graphComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interval graphs admit elegant structural characterizations and linear time recognition algorithms; on the other hand, the usual interval digraphs lack a forbidden structure characterization as well as a low-degree polynomial time recognition algorithm. In this paper we identify another natural digraph analogue of interval graphs that we call ”chronological interval digraphs”. By contrast, the new class admits both a forbidden structure characterization and a linear time recognition algorithm. Chronological interval digraphs arise by interpreting the standard definition of an interval graph with a natural orientation of its edges. Specifically, $G$ is a chronological interval digraph if there exists a family of closed intervals $I_v$, $v \in V(G)$, such that $uv$ is an arc of $G$ if and only if $I_u$ intersects $I_v$ and the left endpoint of $I_u$ is not greater than the left endpoint of $I_v$. (Equivalently, if and only if $I_u$ contains the left endpoint of $I_v$.)We characterize chronological interval digraphs in terms of vertex orderings, in terms of forbidden substructures, and in terms of a novel structure of so-called $Q$-paths. The first two characterizations exhibit strong similarity with the corresponding characterizations of interval graphs. The last characterization leads to a linear time recognition algorithm.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.244
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.

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207