MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1949878150 · doi:10.1137/1.9781611973730.114

Forbidden structure characterization of circular-arc graphs and a certifying recognition algorithm

2014· preprint· en· W1949878150 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew C. Francis, Pavol Hell, Juraj Stacho

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsChordal graphIntersection graphSplit graphAlgorithmInterval graphBlock graphTime complexityDiscrete mathematicsArc (geometry)MathematicsGraphIndifference graphLine graph1-planar graphGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A circular-arc graph is the intersection graph of arcs of a circle. It is a well-studied graph model with numerous natural applications. A certifying algorithm is an algorithm that outputs a certificate, along with its answer (be it positive or negative), where the certificate can be used to easily justify the given answer. While the recognition of circular-arc graphs has been known to be polynomial since the 1980s, no polynomial-time certifying recognition algorithm is known to date, despite such algorithms being found for many subclasses of circular-arc graphs. This is largely due to the fact that a forbidden structure characterization of circular-arc graphs is not known, even though the problem has been intensely studied since the seminal work of Klee in the 1960s. In this contribution, we settle this problem. We present the first forbidden structure characterization of circular-arc graphs. Our obstruction has the form of mutually avoiding walks in the graph. It naturally extends a similar obstruction that characterizes interval graphs. As a consequence, we give the first polynomial-time certifying algorithm for the recognition of circular-arc graphs.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.283
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207