MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A strengthening and a multipartite generalization of the Alon-Boppana-Serre theorem

2010· article· en· W2090115063 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the American Mathematical Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
KeywordsMultipartiteVertex (graph theory)Bounded functionEigenvalues and eigenvectorsDegree (music)Mathematical proofGraphGeneralization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alon-Boppana theorem confirms that for every ε > 0 \varepsilon >0 and every integer d ≥ 3 d\ge 3 , there are only finitely many d d -regular graphs whose second largest eigenvalue is at most 2 d − 1 − ε 2\sqrt {d-1}-\varepsilon . Serre gave a strengthening showing that a positive proportion of eigenvalues of any d d -regular graph must be bigger than 2 d − 1 − ε 2\sqrt {d-1}-\varepsilon . We provide a multipartite version of this result. Our proofs are elementary and also work in the case when graphs are not regular. In the simplest, monopartite case, our result extends the Alon-Boppana-Serre result to non-regular graphs of minimum degree d d and bounded maximum degree. The two-partite result shows that for every ε > 0 \varepsilon >0 and any positive integers d 1 , d 2 , d d_1,d_2,d , every n n -vertex graph of maximum degree at most d d , whose vertex set is the union of (not necessarily disjoint) subsets V 1 , V 2 V_1,V_2 , such that every vertex in

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.024
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0040.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.013

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the American Mathematical SocietySame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207