MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026680711 · doi:10.1142/s179383091100136x

DIAMETER-CONSTRAINED STEINER TREES

2011· article· en· W2026680711 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

VenueDiscrete Mathematics Algorithms and Applications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteiner tree problemCombinatoricsMathematicsBounded functionGomory–Hu treeTree (set theory)k-minimum spanning treeConnected dominating setGraphEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionDiscrete mathematicsK-ary treeMinimum spanning treeTopology (electrical circuits)Tree structureComputer scienceBinary treeTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given an edge-weighted undirected graph G = (V, E, c, w), where each edge e ∈ E has a non-negative cost c(e) and a non-negative weight w(e), a set S ⊆ V of terminals and a positive constant D 0 , we seek a minimum cost Steiner tree in which all terminals appear as leaves and the tree diameter is bounded by D 0 . Here the tree diameter is the maximum weight of the paths connecting two different leaves in the tree. Such a problem is called the minimum cost diameter-constrained Steiner tree problem. The problem is NP-hard even when the topology of the Steiner tree is fixed. In present paper we focus on this fixed topology restricted version and present a fully polynomial time approximation scheme for computing a minimum cost diameter-constrained Steiner tree.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.251 · 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