MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115400861 · doi:10.1109/soac.1990.82194

A faster algorithm for weighted distance tiles

2002· article· en· W2115400861 on OpenAlexaff
J. A. Hoskins, W. D. Hoskins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmTileComputer scienceGraphicsSequence (biology)CombinatoricsRanking (information retrieval)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dirichlet tesselation is commonly used in the biological sciences to model competition between individuals. A recognized weakness of this approach, however, is the lack of ability to consider individual attributes such as size or height. The concept of weighted distance tiles, which would address this weakness, was initially developed by F. Aurenhammer et al. (1984) and an algorithm using inversive geometry described. The authors develop an algorithm which is simpler and more effective at determining these complex tessellations and is organized to make maximum use of the graphics concept of early rejection. A sequence of improving approximations to the final tile is obtained. Three diagrams were produced by an implementation of this algorithm and depict (1) vertices whose weights are all equal, (2) some vertices with equal weights and some vertices with unequal weights, and (3) vertices with unequal weights.>

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.014

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207