MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001998099 · doi:10.7151/dmgt.1377

Couterexample to a conjecture on the structure of bipartite partionable graphs

2007· article· en· W2001998099 on OpenAlexaff
Richard G. Gibson, Christina M. Mynhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscussiones Mathematicae Graph Theory · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsBipartite graphCartesian productConjectureDisjoint setsPartition (number theory)CounterexampleDiscrete mathematicsVertex (graph theory)GraphEdge-transitive graphGraph powerLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A graph G is called a prism fixer if (G ×K2) = (G), where (G) denotes the domination number of G. A symmetric -set of G is a minimum dominating set D which admits a partition D = D1 ∪ D2 such that V (G) − N[Di] = Dj, i,j = 1,2, i 6 j. It is known that G is a prism fixer if and only if G has a symmetric -set. Hartnell and Rall [On dominating the Cartesian product of a graph and K2, Discuss. Math. Graph Theory 24 (2004), 389–402] conjectured that if G is a connected, bipartite graph such that V (G) can be partitioned into symmetric -sets, then G ∼ C4 or G can be obtained from K2t,2t by removing the edges of t vertex-disjoint 4-cycles. We construct a counterexample to this conjecture and prove an alternative result on the structure of such bipartite 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscussiones Mathematicae Graph TheorySame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207