MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2404905038

Boundary powerful k-alliances in graphs.

2013· article· en· W2404905038 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ismael G. Yero, Juan A. Rodríguez‐Velázquez

Bibliographic record

VenueArs Combinatoria · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsVertex (graph theory)AllianceBoundary (topology)CombinatoricsGraphOffensiveDiscrete mathematicsMathematical analysisPolitical scienceOperations research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A global boundary defensive k-alliance in a graph G = (V,E) is a dominating set S of vertices of G with the property that every vertex in S has k more neighbors in S than it has outside of S. A global boundary offensive k-alliance in a graph G is a set S of vertices of G with the property that every vertex in V − S has k more neighbors in S than it has outside of S. We define a global boundary powerful k-alliance as a set S of vertices of G, which is both global boundary defensive k-alliance and global boundary offensive (k + 2)-alliance. In this paper we study mathematical properties of boundary powerful k-alliances. In particular, we obtain several bounds (closed formulas for the case of regular graphs) on the cardinality of every global boundary powerful k-alliance. In addition, we consider the case in which the vertex set of a graph G can be partitioned into two boundary powerful k-alliances, showing that, in such a case, k = −1 and, ifG is δ-regular, its algebraic connectivity is equal to δ + 1.

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)0.011
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArs CombinatoriaSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207