MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124089227

An Algorithm for the MaxMin Area Triangulation of a Convex Polygon

2003· article· en· W2124089227 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Keil, Tzvetalin S. Vassilev

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Conference on Computational Geometry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum-weight triangulationPolygon (computer graphics)Convex polygonTriangulationPoint set triangulationMathematicsPitteway triangulationStar-shaped polygonPolygon coveringCombinatoricsRegular polygonDiagonalRectilinear polygonAlgorithmComputer scienceDelaunay triangulationSimple polygonConvex optimizationConvex setBowyer–Watson algorithmGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a convex polygon in the plane, we are interested in triangulations of its interior, i.e. maximal sets of nonintersecting diagonals that subdivide the interior of the polygon into triangles. The MaxMin area triangulation is the triangulation of the polygon that maximizes the area of the smallest area triangle in the triangulation. There exists a dynamic programming algorithm that computes the optimal triangulation with respect to a number of optimality criteria in Θ(n 3 ) time and Θ(n 2 ) space, [4]. We present an algorithm that constructs the MaxMin area triangulation of a convex polygon in O(n 2 log n log log n) time and O(n 2 ) space. The algorithm is based on the dynamic programming approach and uses a number of problem-specific geometric properties that are established within the paper.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations6
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Conference on Computational GeometrySame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207