MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051690202 · doi:10.5555/982792.982853

An optimal randomized algorithm for maximum Tukey depth

2004· article· en· W2051690202 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

VenueSymposium on Discrete Algorithms · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsRandomized algorithmDimension (graph theory)AlgorithmPoint (geometry)Linear programmingSet (abstract data type)CombinatoricsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the first optimal algorithm to compute the maximum Tukey depth (also known as location or halfspace depth) for a non-degenerate point set in the plane. The algorithm is randomized and requires O(n log n) expected time for n data points. In a higher fiexed dimension d ≥ 3, the expected time bound is O(nd-1), which is probably optimal as well. The result is obtained using an interesting variant of the author's randomized optimization technique, capable of solving implicit linear-programming-type problems; some other applications of this technique are briefly mentioned.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.262 · 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