MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617869480

Harmonic Mean Labeling for Some Special Graphs

2013· article· en· W2617869480 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. S. Sandhya, S. Somasundaram

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Labeling and Dimension Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsGraphHarmonic meanEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionHarmonicGeometryPhysicsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A graph G = (V, E) with p vertices and q edges is said to be a Harmonic mean graph if it is possible to label the vertices x∈V with distinct labels f(x) from 1, 2, ..., q+1 in such a way that when each edge e =uv is labeled with f(e = uv) = [2f(u)f(v)/f(u)f(v)] or [2f(u)f(v)/f(u)f(v)], then the edge labels are distinct. In this case f is called Harmonic mean labeling of G. In this paper we prove the Harmonic mean labeling behavior for some special graphs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicGraph Labeling and Dimension ProblemsFrench-language works237,207