On a Reduction of the Interval Coloring Problem to a Series of Bandwidth Coloring Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given a graph G=(V,E) with strictly positive integer weights ? i on the vertices i?V, an interval coloring of G is a function I that assigns an interval I(i) of ? i consecutive integers (called colors) to each vertex i?V so that I(i)?I(j)=? for all edges {i,j}?E. The interval coloring problem is to determine an interval coloring that uses as few colors as possible. Assuming that a strictly positive integer weight ? ij is associated with each edge {i,j}?E, a bandwidth coloring of G is a function c that assigns an integer (called a color) to each vertex i?V so that |c(i)?c(j)|?? ij for all edges {i,j}?E. The bandwidth coloring problem is to determine a bandwidth coloring with minimum difference between the largest and the smallest colors used. We prove that an optimal solution of the interval coloring problem can be obtained by solving a series of bandwidth coloring problems. Computational experiments demonstrate that such a reduction can help to solve larger instances or to obtain better upper bounds on the optimal solution value of the interval coloring problem.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".