MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030362910 · doi:10.1017/s0963548309990216

The <i>t</i>-Improper Chromatic Number of Random Graphs

2009· article· en· W2030362910 on OpenAlexaff
Ross J. Kang, Colin McDiarmid

Bibliographic record

VenueCombinatorics Probability Computing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatic scaleCombinatoricsMathematicsRandom graphGraphConstant (computer programming)Discrete mathematicsDegree (music)Computer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the t-improper chromatic number of the Erdős–Rényi random graph Gn,p. The t-improper chromatic number χt(G) is the smallest number of colours needed in a colouring of the vertices in which each colour class induces a subgraph of maximum degree at most t. If t = 0, then this is the usual notion of proper colouring. When the edge probability p is constant, we provide a detailed description of the asymptotic behaviour of χt(Gn,p) over the range of choices for the growth of t = t(n).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCombinatorics Probability ComputingSame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207