Approximating Minimum-Size <i>k</i>-Connected Spanning Subgraphs via Matching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An efficient heuristic is presented for the problem of finding a minimum-size k-connected spanning subgraph of an (undirected or directed) simple graph G=(V,E). There are four versions of the problem, and the approximation guarantees are as follows:minimum-size k-node connected spanning subgraph of an undirected graph 1 + [1/k], minimum-size k-node connected spanning subgraph of a directed graph 1 + [1/k], minimum-size k-edge connected spanning subgraph of an undirected graph 1+[2/(k+1)], minimum-size k-edge connected spanning subgraph of a directed graph 1 + [4/\sqrt{k}]. The heuristic is based on a subroutine for the degree-constrained subgraph (b-matching) problem. It is simple and deterministic and runs in time O(k|E|2). The following result on simple undirected graphs is used in the analysis: The number of edges required for augmenting a graph of minimum degree k to be k-edge connected is at most k,|V|/(k+1). For undirected graphs and k=2, a (deterministic) parallel NC version of the heuristic finds a 2-node connected (or 2-edge connected) spanning subgraph whose size is within a factor of ($1.5+\epsilon$) of minimum, where $\epsilon > 0$ is a constant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".