MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1821109783 · doi:10.37236/3357

A Note on the Acquaintance Time of Random Graphs

2013· article· en· W1821109783 on OpenAlexafffund
William B. Kinnersley, Dieter Mitsche, Paweł Prałat

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsConjectureUpper and lower boundsRandom graphGraphVertex (graph theory)Binary logarithmDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this short note, we prove the conjecture of Benjamini, Shinkar, and Tsur on the acquaintance time $\mathcal{AC}(G)$ of a random graph $G \in G(n,p)$. It is shown that asymptotically almost surely $\mathcal{AC}(G) = O(\log n / p)$ for $G \in G(n,p)$, provided that $pn > (1+\epsilon) \log n$ for some $\epsilon > 0$ (slightly above the threshold for connectivity). Moreover, we show a matching lower bound for dense random graphs, which also implies that asymptotically almost surely $K_n$ cannot be covered with $o(\log n / p)$ copies of a random graph $G \in G(n,p)$, provided that $pn > n^{1/2+\epsilon}$ and $p < 1-\epsilon$ for some $\epsilon>0$. We conclude the paper with a small improvement on the general upper bound showing that for any $n$-vertex graph $G$, we have $\mathcal{AC}(G) = O(n^2/\log n )$.

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)0.045
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.014
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207