MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161871333

Guaranteed Voronoi Diagrams of Uncertain Sites

2008· article· en· W2161871333 on OpenAlexaff
William Evans

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoronoi diagramWeighted Voronoi diagramPower diagramGeneralizationCentroidal Voronoi tessellationPoint (geometry)Set (abstract data type)DiagramComputer scienceComputational geometryBowyer–Watson algorithmPoint locationPlane (geometry)MathematicsCombinatoricsAlgorithmGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we investigate the Voronoi diagram that is induced by a set of sites in the plane, where each site’s precise location is uncertain but is known to be within a particular region, and the cells of this diagram contain those points guaranteed to be closest to a particular site. We then examine the diagram for sites with disc-shaped regions of uncertainty, prove that it has linear complexity, and provide an optimal O(n log n) algorithm for its construction. We also examine the diagram for polygonal regions of uncertainty, and prove that it has linear complexity as well. We then describe a generalization of these diagrams, in which each Voronoi cell is associated with a subset of the sites, and each point in a cell is guaranteed to be closest to some site in the subset associated with the cell. 1

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)0.013
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations61
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207