MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168975199 · doi:10.5555/1898699.1898769

Optimal map construction of an unknown torus

2006· article· en· W2168975199 on OpenAlexaff
Hanane Becha, Paola Flocchini

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorusSecurity tokenNode (physics)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer scienceMulti-agent systemMathematicsAlgorithmCombinatoricsTopology (electrical circuits)Discrete mathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryComputer networkPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we consider the map construction prob-lem in the case of an anonymous, unoriented torus of unknown size. An agent that can move from node to neighbouring node in the torus is initially placed in an arbitrary node and has to construct an edge-labeled map. In other words, it has to draw, in its local mem-ory, an edge-labeled torus isomorphic to the one it is moving on. The agent has enough local memory to represent the torus and one or two tokens that can be dropped on and picked up from nodes. Efficiency is measured in terms of number of moves performed by the agent. When the agent has no token available, the problem is clearly unsolvable. In the paper we show that, when the agent has one token available there exists an opti-mal algorithm for constructing the map of the torus; the agent, in fact, performs Θ(N) moves (where N is the number of nodes of the torus). Before showing the optimal solution with the optimal number of tokens, we describe a simpler solution that works when two to-kens are available, we then modify it to obtain the same bound when the agent has only one token available.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207