MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006429817 · doi:10.1002/net.21490

Shortest paths avoiding forbidden subpaths

2013· article· en· W2006429817 on OpenAlexaff
Mustaq Ahmed, Anna Lubiw

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShortest path problemDistanceK shortest path routingCombinatoricsYen's algorithmLongest path problemEuclidean shortest pathConstrained Shortest Path FirstShortest Path Faster AlgorithmWidest path problemPath (computing)MathematicsDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceGraphDijkstra's algorithmComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study a variant of the shortest path problem in graphs: given a weighted graph Gand vertices sand t, and given a set Xof forbidden paths in G, find a shortest s‐ tpath Psuch that no path in Xis a subpath of P. Path Pis allowed to repeat vertices and edges. We call each path in Xan exception, and our desired path a shortest exception avoiding path. We formulate a new version of the problem where the algorithm has no a priori knowledge of X, and finds out about an exception x∈Xonly when a path containing xfails. This situation arises in computing shortest paths in optical networks. We give an algorithm that finds a shortest exception avoiding path in time polynomial in |G| and |X|. The main idea is to use a shortest path algorithm incrementally after replicating vertices when an exception is discovered. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Numer Methods Partial Differential Eq 2013

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetworksSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207