Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the study of deterministic distributed algorithms, it is commonly assumed that each node has a unique O (log n )-bit identifier. We prove that for a general class of graph problems, local algorithms (constant-time distributed algorithms) do not need such identifiers: a port numbering and orientation is sufficient. Our result holds for so-called simple PO- checkable graph optimisation problems ; this includes many classical packing and covering problems such as vertex covers, edge covers, matchings, independent sets, dominating sets, and edge dominating sets. We focus on the case of bounded-degree graphs and show that if a local algorithm finds a constant-factor approximation of a simple PO-checkable graph problem with the help of unique identifiers, then the same approximation ratio can be achieved on anonymous networks. As a corollary of our result, we derive a tight lower bound on the local approximability of the minimum edge dominating set problem . By prior work, there is a deterministic local algorithm that achieves the approximation factor of 4--1/⌊Δ/2⌋ in graphs of maximum degree Δ. This approximation ratio is known to be optimal in the port-numbering model—our main theorem implies that it is optimal also in the standard model in which each node has a unique identifier. Our main technical tool is an algebraic construction of homogeneously ordered graphs : We say that a graph is (α, r )-homogeneous if its nodes are linearly ordered so that an α fraction of nodes have pairwise isomorphic radius- r neighbourhoods. We show that there exists a finite (α, r )-homogeneous 2 k -regular graph of girth at least g for any α < 1 and any r , k , and g .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".