Bibliographic record
Abstract
We prove tight crossing number inequalities for geometric graphs whose vertex sets are taken from a $d$-dimensional grid of volume $N$ and give applications of these inequalities to counting the number of crossing-free geometric graphs that can be drawn on such grids.In particular, we show that any geometric graph with $m\geq 8N$ edges and with vertices on a 3D integer grid of volume $N$, has $\Omega((m^2/N)\log(m/N))$ crossings. In $d$-dimensions, with $d\ge 4$, this bound becomes $\Omega(m^2/N)$. We provide matching upper bounds for all $d$. Finally, for $d\ge 4$ the upper bound implies that the maximum number of crossing-free geometric graphs with vertices on some $d$-dimensional grid of volume $N$ is $N^{\Theta(N)}$. In 3 dimensions it remains open to improve the trivial bounds, namely, the $2^{\Omega(N)}$ lower bound and the $N^{O(N)}$ upper bound.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".