MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121804749 · doi:10.2168/lmcs-6(4:4)2010

The complexity of global cardinality constraints

2010· article· en· W2121804749 on OpenAlexaff
Andreĭ A. Bulatov, Dániel Marx

Bibliographic record

VenueLogical Methods in Computer Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardinality (data modeling)Constraint satisfaction problemConstraint satisfaction dual problemConstraint (computer-aided design)Set (abstract data type)Constraint satisfactionMathematicsTime complexityComplexity of constraint satisfactionConstraint logic programmingComputational complexity theoryLocal consistencyComputer scienceMathematical optimizationConstraint programmingDiscrete mathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a constraint satisfaction problem (CSP) the goal is to find an assignment of a given set of variables subject to specified constraints. A global cardinality constraint is an additional requirement that prescribes how many variables must be assigned a certain value. We study the complexity of the problem CCSP(G), the constraint satisfaction problem with global cardinality constraints that allows only relations from the set G. The main result of this paper characterizes sets G that give rise to problems solvable in polynomial time, and states that the remaining such problems are NP-complete.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.014
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLogical Methods in Computer ScienceSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207