MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060658636

Complexity of generalized colourings of chordal graphs

2008· dissertation· en· W2060658636 on OpenAlexaff
Juraj Stacho

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChordal graphCombinatoricsMathematicsSplit graphTreewidthPathwidthIndifference graphDiscrete mathematicsInterval graphTime complexityGraph1-planar graphLine graph
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The generalized graph colouring problem (GCOL) for a fixed integer k, and fixed classes of graphs P1,...,Pk (usually describing some common graph properties), is to decide, for a given graph G, whether the vertex set of G can be partitioned into sets V1,...,Vk such that, for each i, the induced subgraph of G on Vi belongs to Pi. It can be seen that GCOL generalizes many natural colouring and partitioning problems on graphs. In this thesis, we focus on generalized colouring problems in chordal graphs. The structure of chordal graphs is known to allow solving many difficult combinatorial problems, such as the graph colouring, maximum clique and others, in polynomial, and in many cases in linear time. Our study of generalized colouring problems focuses on those problems in which the sets Pi are characterized by a single forbidden induced subgraph. We show, that for k = 2, all such problems where the forbidden graphs have at most three vertices are polynomial time solvable in chordal graphs, whereas, it is known that almost all of them are NP-complete in general. On the other hand, we show infinite families of such problems which are NP-complete in chordal graphs. By combining a polynomial algorithm and an

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)0.012
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207