MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167511304 · doi:10.1142/s0129054109006486

ON SPANNERS OF GEOMETRIC GRAPHS

2009· article· en· W2167511304 on OpenAlexaff
Joachim Gudmundsson, Michiel Smid

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsSpannerMathematicsUpper and lower boundsGraphDiscrete mathematicsGeometric graph theoryGraph powerLine graphComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a connected geometric graph G, we consider the problem of constructing a t-spanner of G having the minimum number of edges. We prove that for every real number t with [Formula: see text], there exists a connected geometric graph G with n vertices, such that every t-spanner of G contains Ω(n 1+1/t ) edges. This bound almost matches the known upper bound, which states that every connected weighted graph with n vertices contains a t-spanner with O(n 1+2/(t-1) ) edges. We also prove that the problem of deciding whether a given geometric graph contains a t-spanner with at most K edges is NP-hard. Previously, this NP-hardness result was only known for non-geometric graphs.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207