MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564348232

Path graphs and pr-trees

2012· dissertation· en· W2564348232 on OpenAlexaff
Derek G. Corneil, Steven Chaplick

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree (set theory)Path (computing)MathematicsCombinatoricsAckermann functionK-ary treeInverseGomory–Hu treeGraphDiscrete mathematicsTree structureBinary treeComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The PR-tree data structure is introduced to characterize the sets of path-tree models of path graphs. We further characterize the sets of directed path-tree models of directed path graphs with a slightly restricted form of the PR-tree called the Strong PR-tree. Additionally, via PR-trees and Strong PR-trees, we characterize path graphs and directed path graphs by their Split Decompositions. Two distinct approaches (Split Decomposition and Reduction ) are presented to construct a PR-tree that captures the path-tree models of a given graph G = (V, E) with n = |V| and m = |E|. An implementation of the split decomposition approach is presented which runs in O (nm) time. Similarly, an implementation of the reduction approach is presented which runs in O (A(n + m) nm) time (where A(s) is the inverse of Ackermann's function arising from Union-Find [40]). Also, from a PR-tree, an algorithm to construct a corresponding Strong PR-tree is given which runs in O (n + m) time. The sizes of the PR-trees and Strong PR-trees produced by these approaches are O (n + m) with respect to the given graph. Furthermore, we demonstrate that an implicit form of the PR-tree and Strong PR-tree can be represented in O (n) space.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207