Degree-Constrained Orientation of Maximum Satisfaction : Graph Classes and Parameterized Complexity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem MaxW-Light (MaxW-Heavy) for an undirected graph is to assign a direction to each edge so that the number of vertices of outdegree at most W (resp. at least W) is maximized. It is known that these problems are NP-hard even for fixed W. For example, Max 0-Light is equivalent to the problem of finding a maximum independent set. In this paper, we show that for any fixed constant W, MaxW-Heavy can be solved in linear time for hereditary graph classes for which treewidth is bounded by a function of degeneracy. We show that such graph classes include chordal graphs, circular-arc graphs, d-trapezoid graphs, chordal bipartite graphs, and graphs of bounded clique-width. To have a polynomial-time algorithm for MaxW-Light, we need an additional condition of a polynomial upper bound on the number of potential maximal cliques to apply the metatheorem by Fomin et al. (SIAM J Comput 44:54–87, 2015). The aforementioned graph classes, except bounded clique-width graphs, satisfy such a condition. For graphs of bounded clique-width, we present a dynamic programming approach not using the metatheorem to show that it is actually polynomial-time solvable for this graph class too. We also study the parameterized complexity of the problems and show some tractability and intractability results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".