MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605281015 · doi:10.37236/6937

Minimum Degree Conditions for Small Percolating Sets in Bootstrap Percolation

2020· preprint· en· W2605281015 on OpenAlex
Karen Gunderson

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsDegree (music)GraphPath graphIndependent setDiscrete mathematicsGraph powerPhysicsLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The $r$-neighbour bootstrap process is an update rule for the states of vertices in which `uninfected' vertices with at least $r$ `infected' neighbours become infected and a set of initially infected vertices is said to percolate if eventually all vertices are infected. For every $r \geq 3$, a sharp condition is given for the minimum degree of a sufficiently large graph that guarantees the existence of a percolating set of size $r$. In the case $r=3$, for $n$ large enough, any graph on $n$ vertices with minimum degree $\lfloor n/2 \rfloor +1$ has a percolating set of size $3$ and for $r \geq 4$ and $n$ large enough (in terms of $r$), every graph on $n$ vertices with minimum degree $\lfloor n/2 \rfloor + (r-3)$ has a percolating set of size $r$. A class of examples are given to show the sharpness of these 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.216 · 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