MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2405970943

Guarding Orthogonal Terrains.

2015· article· en· W2405970943 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Durocher, Pak Ching Li, Saeed Mehrabi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsGuard (computer science)Vertex (graph theory)TerrainVisibilityMathematicsLine segmentComputer scienceGraphGeometryGeographyCartography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 1.5-dimensional terrain T with n vertices is an x-monotone polygonal chain in the plane. A point guard p on T guards a point q of T if the line segment connect-ing p to q lies on or above T; p is a vertex guard if it is a vertex of T. In the Optimal Terrain Guarding (OTG) problem on T, the objective is to guard the vertices of T by the minimum number of vertex guards. King and Krohn [9] showed that the OTG problem is NP-hard on arbitrary terrains, and Gibson et al. [6] gave a PTAS for this problem. In this paper, we introduce directed visi-bility in which the visibility is directed only at adjacent vertices. We give an O(n)-time algorithm that solves the OTG problem exactly on orthogonal terrains under directed visibility. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207