MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2404458076

Solving Graph Coloring Problems Using Cultural Algorithms.

2011· article· en· W2404458076 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Abbasian, Malek Mouhoub, Amin Jula

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Florida AI Research Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraph coloringGreedy coloringAlgorithmComputer scienceGraphGraph powerTheoretical computer scienceLine graph
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.670
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Florida AI Research SocietySame topicScheduling and Timetabling SolutionsFrench-language works237,207