MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616398144 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v9n3p38

The [a,b]-domination and [a,b]-total Domination of Graphs

2017· article· en· W2616398144 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiujun Zhang, Zehui Shao, Hong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChengdu University
KeywordsDomination analysisMathematicsCombinatoricsVertex (graph theory)Dominating setRowGraphDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A subset $S$ of the vertices of $G = (V, E)$ is an $[a, b]$-set if for every vertex $v$ not in $S$ we have the number of neighbors of $v$ in $S$ is between $a$ and $b$ for non-negative integers $a$ and $b$, that is, every vertex $v$ not in $S$ is adjacent to at least $a$ but not more than $b$ vertices in $S$. The minimum cardinality of an $[a, b]$-set of $G$ is called the $[a, b]$-domination number of $G$. The $[a, b]$-domination problem is to determine the $[a, b]$-domination number of a graph. In this paper, we show that the [2,b]-domination problem is NP-complete for $b$ at least $3$, and the [1,2]-total domination problem is NP-complete. We also determine the [1,2]-total domination and [1,2] domination numbers of toroidal grids with three rows and four rows.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.345 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207