Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Path finding solutions are becoming a major part of many GIS applications including location based services and web-based GIS services. Most traditional path finding solutions are based on shortest path algorithms that tend to minimize the cost of travel from one point to another. These algorithms make use of some cost criteria that is usually an attribute of the edges in the graph network. Providing one shortest path limits user's flexibility when choosing a possible route, especially when more than one parameter is utilized to calculate cost (e.g., when length, number of traffic lights, and number of turns are used to calculate network cost.) K shortest path solutions tend to overcome this problem by providing second, third, and Kth shortest paths. These algorithms are efficient as long as the graphs edge weight does not change dynamically and no other parameters affect edge weights. In this paper we try to go beyond finding shortest paths based on some cost value, and provide all possible paths disregarding any parameter that may affect total cost. After finding all possible paths, we can rank the results by any parameter or combination of parameters, without a substantial increase in time complexity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".