MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999225375 · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/42/1/023

Eulerian graph embeddings and trails confined to lattice tubes

2006· article· en· W1999225375 on OpenAlexaff
C E Soteros

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEulerian pathCombinatoricsEmbeddingMathematicsExponentCrossing number (knot theory)Lattice (music)Polygon (computer graphics)Upper and lower boundsDiscrete mathematicsGraph embeddingGraphComputer sciencePure mathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisKnot (papermaking)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embeddings of graphs in sublattices of the square and simple cubic lattice known as tubes (or prisms) are considered. For such sublattices, two combinatorial bounds are obtained which each relate the number of embeddings of all closed eulerian graphs with k branch points (vertices of degree greater than two) to the number of self-avoiding polygons. From these bounds it is proved that the entropic critical exponent for the number of embeddings of closed eulerian graphs with k branch points is equal to k, and the entropic critical exponent for the number of closed trails with k branch points is equal to k + 1. One of the required combinatorial bounds is obtained via Madras' 1999 lattice cluster pattern theorem, which yields a bound on the number of ways to convert a self-avoiding polygon into a closed eulerian graph embedding with k branch points. The other combinatorial bound is established by constructing a method for sequentially removing branch points from a closed eulerian graph embedding; this yields a bound on the number of ways to convert a closed eulerian graph embedding into a self-avoiding polygon.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicAdvanced Combinatorial MathematicsFrench-language works237,207