MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611912062 · doi:10.1002/jgt.22579

Generating simple near‐bipartite bricks

2020· preprint· en· W2611912062 on OpenAlexafffund
Nishad Kothari, Marcelo H. de Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Graph Theory · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento do Ensino, Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de Mato Grosso do SulUniversity of WaterlooConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsBipartite graphCombinatoricsBrickMathematicsMatching (statistics)Vertex (graph theory)Complete bipartite graphSimple (philosophy)Class (philosophy)Discrete mathematicsGraphComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A brick is a 3‐connected graph such that the graph obtained from it by deleting any two distinct vertices has a perfect matching. A brick is near ‐ bipartite if it has a pair of edges and such that is bipartite and matching covered; examples are and the triangular prism . The significance of near‐bipartite bricks arises from the theory of ear decompositions of matching covered graphs. The object of this paper is to establish a generation procedure which is specific to the class of simple near‐bipartite bricks. In particular, we prove that every simple near‐bipartite brick has an edge such that the graph obtained from by contracting each edge that is incident with a vertex of degree two is also a simple near‐bipartite brick, unless belongs to any of eight well‐defined infinite families. This is a refinement of the brick generation theorem of Norine and Thomas which is applicable to the class of near‐bipartite bricks. Earlier, the first author proved a similar generation theorem for (not necessarily simple) near‐bipartite bricks; we deduce our main result from this theorem. Our proof is based on a strategy of Carvalho, Lucchesi and Murty and uses several of their techniques and 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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Graph TheorySame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207