An efficient practical heuristic for good ratio-cut partitioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an efficient heuristic for finding good bipartitions of the vertex set of a graph in the sense of the well-known measure of ratioCut (essentially the ratio between weight of cut edges and the product of weights of the nodesets of the bipartition). The widely accepted ratioCut bipartitioning algorithm of Wei and Cheng is similar in spirit to the Fiduccia-Mattheyeses algorithm (F-M algorithm). Our approach makes use of F-M algorithm as the first phase that takes in as an input, random bipartitions. In the later phase of our algorithm we make use of a new coarsening strategy and follow it up with a submodular function optimization algorithm on the coarsened graph. We also present the comparison of results of this approach applied to benchmark circuits with the well-established algorithms such as the Wei-Cheng algorithm for ratioCut bipartitioning and pmetis of Metis package. The comparative study not only shows that this new approach indeed produces good quality ratioCut bipartitions, but also the fact that this approach has the potential of finding a large number of such good partitions in comparison with other approaches. The key subroutine in our heuristic strategies is based on the recent finding about the role of submodular functions in designing new heuristics and approximate algorithms to some NP-hard problems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".