MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600390700 · doi:10.46298/dmtcs.3087

Computing Tutte Polynomials

2012· article· fr· W2600390700 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

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMathematics
TopicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesTutte polynomialCombinatoricsMapleMathematicsGraphArtBotanyLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new edge selection heuristic and vertex ordering heuristic that together enable one to compute the Tutte polynomial of much larger sparse graphs than was previously doable. As a specific example, we are able to compute the Tutte polynomial of the truncated icosahedron graph using our Maple implementation in under 4 minutes on a single CPU. This compares with a recent result of Haggard, Pearce and Royle whose special purpose C++ software took one week on 150 computers. Nous présentons deux nouvelles heuristiques pour le calcul du polynôme de Tutte de graphes de faible densité, basées sur les principes de sélection d'arêtes et d'arrangement linéaire de sommets, et qui permettent de traiter des graphes de bien plus grande tailles que les méthodes existantes. Par exemple, en utilisant notre implémentation en Maple, nous pouvons calculer le polynôme de Tutte de l'isocahédron tronqué en moins de 4 minutes sur un ordinateur à processeur unique, alors qu'un programme ad-hoc récent de Haggard, Pearce et Royle, utilisant 150 ordinateurs, a nécessité une semaine de calcul pour obtenir le même résultat.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.299 · 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