MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550943709

A Pruning based Ant Colony Algorithm for Minimum Vertex Cover Problem.

2009· article· en· W2550943709 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIJCCI · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVertex coverTree traversalGraph traversalAlgorithmVertex (graph theory)Feedback vertex setEdge coverPruningMathematicsCardinality (data modeling)Ant colony optimization algorithmsReachabilityComputer scienceGraphCombinatoricsMathematical optimizationApproximation algorithmData mining
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given an undirected, unweighted graph G = (V , E) the minimum vertex cover (MVC) problem is a subset of V whose cardinality is minimum subject to the premise that the selected vertices cover all edges in the graph. In this paper, we propose a meta-heuristic based on Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) approach to find approximate solutions to the minimum vertex cover problem. By introducing a visible set based on pruning paradigm for ants, in each step of their traversal, they are not forced to consider all of the remaining vertices to select the next one for continuing the traversal, resulting very high improvement in both time and convergence rate of the algorithm. We compare our algorithm with two existing algorithms which are based on Genetic Algorithms (GAs) as well as its testing on a variety of benchmarks. Computational experiments evince that the ACO algorithm demonstrates much effectiveness and consistency for solving the minimum vertex cover problem.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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