MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044097137 · doi:10.1002/jgt.10133

Graphs embedded in the plane with a bounded number of accumulation points

2003· article· en· W2044097137 on OpenAlexaff
C. Paul Bonnington, R. Bruce Richter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Graph Theory · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsEmbeddingBounded functionPlanar graphVertex (graph theory)1-planar graphDiscrete mathematicsPlane (geometry)Chordal graphCharacterization (materials science)GraphGeometryMathematical analysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Halin's Theorem characterizes those infinite connected graphs that have an embedding in the plane with no accumulation points, by exhibiting the list of excluded subgraphs. We generalize this by obtaining a similar characterization of which infinite connected graphs have an embedding in the plane (and other surfaces) with at most k accumulation points. Thomassen [ 7 ] provided a different characterization of those infinite connected graphs that have an embedding in the plane with no accumulation points as those for which the ℤ2‐vector space generated by the cycles has a basis for which every edge is in at most two members. Adopting the definition that the cycle space is the set of all edge‐sets of subgraphs in which every vertex has even degree (and allowing restricted infinite sums), we prove a general analogue of Thomassens's result, obtaining a cycle space characterization of a graph having an embedding in the sphere with k accumulation points. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory 44: 132–147, 2003

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Graph TheorySame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207