MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177638926 · doi:10.5555/2095116.2095235

Approximating rooted Steiner networks

2012· article· en· W2177638926 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Cheriyan, Bundit Laekhanukit, Guyslain Naves, Adrian Vetta

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Discrete Algorithms · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteiner tree problemCombinatoricsGeneralizationLinear programming relaxationUndirected graphMathematicsApproximation algorithmDiscrete mathematicsLinear programmingFocus (optics)Relaxation (psychology)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Directed Steiner Tree (DST) problem is a cornerstone problem in network design. We focus on the generalization of the problem with higher connectivity requirements. The problem with one root and two sinks is APX-hard. The problem with one root and many sinks is as hard to approximate as the directed Steiner forest problem, and the latter is well known to be as hard to approximate as the label cover problem. Utilizing previous techniques (due to others), we strengthen these results and extend them to undirected graphs. Specifically, we give an Ω(ke) hardness bound for the rooted k-connectivity problem in undirected graphs; this addresses a recent open question of Khanna. As a consequence, we also obtain the Ω(ke) hardness of the undirected subset k-connectivity problem. Additionally, we give a result on the integrality ratio of the natural linear programming relaxation of the directed rooted k-connectivity problem.

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)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium on Discrete AlgorithmsSame topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207