Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guarding a polygon with few guards is an old and well-studied problem in computational geometry. Here we consider the following variant: We assume that the polygon is orthogonal and thin in some sense, and we consider a point $p$ to guard a point $q$ if and only if the minimum axis-aligned rectangle spanned by $p$ and $q$ is inside the polygon. A simple proof shows that this problem is NP-hard on orthogonal polygons with holes, even if the polygon is thin. If there are no holes, then a thin polygon becomes a tree polygon in the sense that the so-called dual graph of the polygon is a tree. It was known that finding the minimum set of $r$-guards is polynomial for tree polygons, but the run-time was $\tilde{O}(n^{17})$. We show here that with a different approach the running time becomes linear, answering a question posed by Biedl et al. (SoCG 2011). Furthermore, the approach is much more general, allowing to specify subsets of points to guard and guards to use, and it generalizes to polygons with $h$ holes or thickness $K$, becoming fixed-parameter tractable in $h+K$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".