MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185561909

The spanning ratio of the Delaunay triangulation is greater than = 2

2009· article· en· W2185561909 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

VenueCanadian Conference on Computational Geometry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationCombinatoricsEuclidean minimum spanning treeMathematicsSpanning treeShortest path problemPitteway triangulationDiscrete mathematicsGraphKruskal's algorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider the Delaunay triangulation T of a set P of points in the plane. The spanning ratio of T , i.e. the maximum ratio between the length of the shortest path between this pair on the graph of the triangulation and their Euclidean distance. It has long been conjectured that the spanning ratio of T can be at most = 2. We show in this note that there exist point sets in convex position with a spanning ratio > 1:5810 and in general position with a spanning ratio > 1:5846, both of which are strictly larger than = 2 1:5708. Furthermore, we show that any set of points drawn independently from the same distribution will, with high probability, have a spanning ratio larger than = 2.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.219 · 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