MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164043220 · doi:10.1002/net.10023

Efficient algorithms for centers and medians in interval and circular‐arc graphs

2002· article· en· W2164043220 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of SaskatchewanSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterval graphCombinatoricsMedianMathematicsInterval (graph theory)GraphVertex (graph theory)AlgorithmArc (geometry)Time complexityDiscrete mathematicsLine graphPathwidthGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The p ‐center problem is to locate p facilities on a network so as to minimize the largest distance from a demand point to its nearest facility. The p ‐median problem is to locate p facilities on a network so as to minimize the average distance from a demand point to its closest facility. We consider these problems when the network can be modeled by an interval or circular‐arc graph whose edges have unit lengths. We provide, given the interval model of an n vertex interval graph, an O ( n ) time algorithm for the 1‐median problem on the interval graph. We also show how to solve the p ‐median problem, for arbitrary p , on an interval graph in O ( pn log n ) time and on a circular‐arc graph in O ( pn 2 log n ) time. We introduce a spring representation of the objective function and show how to solve the p ‐center problem on a circular‐arc graph in O ( pn ) time, assuming that the arc endpoints are sorted. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.193 · 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