MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296221246

The Approximability and Integrality Gap of Interval Stabbing and Independence Problems

2012· article· en· W2296221246 on OpenAlexaff
Shalev Ben-David, Elyot Grant, Will Ma, Malcolm Sharpe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Conference on Computational Geometry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsRectangleCombinatoricsInterval (graph theory)Linear programmingIndependence (probability theory)Approximation algorithmSet (abstract data type)Discrete mathematicsDuality (order theory)Independent setUpper and lower boundsPlane (geometry)Duality gapMathematical optimizationOptimization problemGraphComputer scienceStatisticsMathematical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by problems such as rectangle stabbing in the plane, we study the minimum hitting set and maximum independent set problems for families of d-intervals and d-union-intervals. We obtain the following: (1) constructions yielding asymptotically tight lower bounds on the integrality gaps of the associated natural linear programming relaxations; (2) an LP-relative dapproximation for the hitting set problem ond-intervals; (3) a proof that the approximation ratios for independent set on families of 2-intervals and 2-union-intervals can be improved to match tight duality gap lower bounds obtained via topological arguments, if one has access to an oracle for a PPAD-complete problem related to nding Borsuk-Ulam xed-points.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Conference on Computational GeometrySame topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207