MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491086478 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2016-048-1

The Metric Dimension of Circulant Graphs

2016· article· en· W2491086478 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tomáš Vetrík

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Labeling and Dimension Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsConjectureVertex (graph theory)GraphDimension (graph theory)Circulant matrixMetric dimensionDiscrete mathematicsLine graphPathwidth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A subsetWof the vertex set of a graphGis called aresolving setofGif for every pair of distinct verticesu,vofG, there isw∊Wsuch that the distance ofwanduis different from the distance ofwandv. The cardinality of a smallest resolving set is called the metric dimension ofG, denoted by dim(G). The circulant graphCn(1, 2, . . . ,t) consists of the verticesv0,v1, . . . ,vn−1and the edgesvivi+j, where 0 ≤i≤n− 1, 1 ≤j≤t( ), the indices are taken modulon. Grigorious, Manuel, Miller, Rajan, and Stephen proved that dim(Cn(1, 2, . . . ,t)) ≥t+ 1 for , and they presented a conjecture saying that dim(Cn(1, 2, . . . ,t)) =t+p− 1 forn= 2tk+t+p, where 3 ≤p≤t+ 1. We disprove both statements. We show that ift≥ 4 is even, there exists an infinite set of values ofnsuch that dim(Cn(1, 2, . . . ,t)) =t. We also prove that dim(Cn(1, 2, . . . ,t)) ≤t+p/2 forn= 2tk+t+p, wheretandpare even,t≥ 4, 2 ≤p≤t, andk≥ 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Mathematical BulletinSame topicGraph Labeling and Dimension ProblemsFrench-language works237,207