MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976120600 · doi:10.1142/s0129054100000260

ON THE CLIQUE-WIDTH OF SOME PERFECT GRAPH CLASSES

2000· article· en· W1976120600 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

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsClique graphTreewidthSplit graphVertex (graph theory)Chordal graphBlock graphBounded functionGraphPathwidthLine graphGraph power1-planar graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphs of clique–width at most k were introduced by Courcelle, Engelfriet and Rozenberg (1993) as graphs which can be defined by k-expressions based on graph operations which use k vertex labels. In this paper we study the clique–width of perfect graph classes. On one hand, we show that every distance–hereditary graph, has clique–width at most 3, and a 3–expression defining it can be obtained in linear time. On the other hand, we show that the classes of unit interval and permutation graphs are not of bounded clique–width. More precisely, we show that for every [Formula: see text] there is a unit interval graph I n and a permutation graph H n having n 2 vertices, each of whose clique–width is at least n. These results allow us to see the border within the hierarchy of perfect graphs between classes whose clique–width is bounded and classes whose clique–width is unbounded. Finally we show that every n×n square grid, [Formula: see text], n ≥ 3, has clique–width exactly n+1.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0050.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.312 · 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