MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395489635 · doi:10.5555/2627817.2627898

Dynamic graph connectivity in polylogarithmic worst case time

2013· article· en· W2395489635 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce M. Kapron, Valerie King, Ben Mountjoy

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Discrete Algorithms · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsTime complexityBinary logarithmAmortized analysisComputer scienceGraphEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionPreprocessorUpper and lower boundsData structureMatching (statistics)Discrete mathematicsPath (computing)Sequence (biology)MathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic graph connectivity problem is the following: given a graph on a fixed set of n nodes which is undergoing a sequence of edge insertions and deletions, answer queries of the form q(a, b): Is there a path between nodes a and b? While data structures for this problem with polylogarithmic amortized time per operation have been known since the mid-1990's, these data structures have Θ(n) worst case time. In fact, no previously known solution has worst case time per operation which is o(√n).We present a solution with worst case times O(log4n) per edge insertion, O(log5n) per edge deletion, and O(log n/log log n) per query. The answer to each query is correct if the answer is yes and is correct with high probability if the answer is no. The data structure is based on a simple novel idea which can be used to quickly identify an edge in a cutset.Our technique can be used to simplify and significantly speed up the preprocessing time for the emergency planning problem while matching previous bounds for an update, and to approximate the sizes of cutsets of dynamic graphs in time O(min{|S|, |V\S|}) for an oblivious adversary.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.017
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations141
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium on Discrete AlgorithmsSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207