MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462178547

On approximate min-max theorems for graph connectivity problems

2006· article· en· W2462178547 on OpenAlexaff
Lap Chi Lau

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsSteiner tree problemMathematicsDisjoint setsVertex (graph theory)Spanning treeConjectureDiscrete mathematicsHypergraphGraph
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given an undirected graph G and a subset of vertices S ⊆ V(G), we call the vertices in S the terminal vertices and the vertices in V (G) - S the Steiner vertices. In this thesis, we study two problems whose goals are to achieve high "connectivity" among the terminal vertices. The first problem is the STEINER TREE PACKING problem, where a Steiner tree is a tree that connects the terminal vertices (Steiner vertices are optional). The goal of this problem is to find a largest collection of edge-disjoint Steiner trees. The second problem is the STEINER ROOTED-ORIENTATION problem. In this problem, there is a root vertex r among the terminal vertices. The goal is to find an orientation of all the edges in G so that the Steiner rooted-connectivity is maximized in the resulting directed graph D. The main result of the STEINER TREE PACKING problem is the following approximate min-max relation: If S is 24k-edge-connected in G, then there are k edge-disjoint Steiner trees. This answers Kriesell's conjecture affirmatively up to a constant multiple. We also generalize the above result to the STEINER FOREST PACKING problem. The main result of the STEINER ROOTED-ORIENTATION problem is the following approximate min-max relation: If S is 2k-hyperedge-connected in a hypergraph H, then there is a Steiner rooted k-hyperarc-connected orientation of H. The above result is best possible in terms of the connectivity bound. We shall start this thesis by describing the relations of the problems that we study to the network multicasting problem, which is the starting point of this work.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.023
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0040.013
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207