MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555363315 · doi:10.4153/cmb-2018-005-9

Connectivity in Hypergraphs

2018· article· en· W2555363315 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Mathematical Bulletin · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypergraphVertex (graph theory)Bounded functionVertex connectivityVertex coverPolynomial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we consider two natural notions of connectivity for hypergraphs: weak and strong. We prove that the strong vertex connectivity of a connected hypergraph is bounded by its weak edge connectivity, thereby extending a theorem of Whitney from graphs to hypergraphs. We find that, while determining a minimum weak vertex cut can be done in polynomial time and is equivalent to finding a minimum vertex cut in the 2-section of the hypergraph in question, determining a minimum strong vertex cut is NP-hard for general hypergraphs. Moreover, the problem of finding minimum strong vertex cuts remains NP-hard when restricted to hypergraphs with maximum edge size at most 3. We also discuss the relationship between strong vertex connectivity and the minimum transversal problem for hypergraphs, showing that there are classes of hypergraphs for which one of the problems is NP-hard, while the other can be solved in polynomial time.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.007

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.211 · 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