Solving Graph Coloring Problems Using Cultural Algorithms.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we combine a novel Sequential Graph Coloring Heuristic Algorithm (SGCHA) with a non-systematic method based on a cultural algorithm to solve the graph coloring problem (GCP). The GCP involves finding the minimum number of colors for coloring the graph vertices such that adjacent vertices have distinct colors. In our solving approach, we first use an estimator which is implemented with SGCHA to predict the minimum colors. Then, in the non-systematic part which has been designed using cultural algorithms, we improve the prediction. Various components of the cultural algorithm have been implemented to solve the GCP with a self adaptive behavior in an efficient manner. As a result of utilizing the SGCHA and a cultural algorithm, the proposed method is capable of finding the solution in a very efficient running time. The experimental results show that the proposed algorithm has a high performance in time and quality of the solution returned for solving graph coloring instances taken from DIMACS website. The quality of the solution is measured here by comparing the returned solution with the optimal one.
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 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 | 0.022 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it