MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2238259313 · doi:10.1137/15m1007185

Lehman's Theorem and the Directed Steiner Tree Problem

2016· article· en· W2238259313 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

VenueSIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSteiner tree problemMathematicsCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematicsTree (set theory)Mathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the directed Steiner tree problem, we are given a digraph, nonnegative arc weights, a subset of vertices called terminals, and a special terminal called the root. The goal is to compute a minimum weight directed tree that connects each terminal to the root. We study the classical directed cut linear programming (LP) formulation which has a variable for every arc, and a constraint for every cut that separates a terminal from the root. For what instances is the directed cut LP integral? In this paper we demonstrate how the celebrated theorem of Lehman [Math. Program., 17 (1979), pp. 403--417] on minimally nonideal clutters provides a framework for deriving answers to this question. Specifically, we show that this framework yields short proofs of the optimum arborescences theorem and the integrality result for series-parallel digraphs. Furthermore, we use this framework to show that the directed cut linear program is integral for digraphs that are acyclic and have at most two nonterminal vertices.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.255 · 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