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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic maps that allow continuous map rotations, for example, on mobile devices, encounter new geometric labeling issues unseen in static maps before. We study the following dynamic map labeling problem: The input is an abstract map consisting of a set $P$ of points in the plane with attached horizontally aligned rectangular labels. While the map with the point set $P$ is rotated, all labels remain horizontally aligned. We are interested in a consistent labeling of $P$ under rotation, i.e., an assignment of a single (possibly empty) active interval of angles for each label that determines its visibility under rotations such that visible labels neither intersect each other (soft conflicts) nor occlude points in $P$ at any rotation angle (hard conflicts). Our goal is to find a consistent labeling that maximizes the number of visible labels integrated over all rotation angles. We first introduce a general model for labeling rotating maps and derive basic geometric properties of consistent solutions. We show NP-hardness of the above optimization problem even for unit-square labels. We then present a constant-factor approximation for this problem based on line stabbing, and refine it further into an efficient polynomial-time approximation scheme (EPTAS).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it