MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621324178 · doi:10.5555/1283383.1283446

Tree exploration with logarithmic memory

2007· article· en· W2621324178 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Discrete Algorithms · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraverseComputer scienceNode (physics)Tree (set theory)Network topologyLogarithmBinary logarithmGraphUpper and lower boundsEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionTheoretical computer scienceTask (project management)Topology (electrical circuits)MathematicsCombinatoricsComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the task of network exploration by a mobile agent (robot) with small memory. The agent has to traverse all nodes and edges of a network (represented as an undirected connected graph), and return to the starting node. Nodes of the network are unlabeled and edge ports are locally labeled at each node. The agent has no a priori knowledge of the topology of the network or of its size, and cannot mark nodes in any way. Under such weak assumptions, cycles in the network may prevent feasibility of exploration, hence we restrict attention to trees. We present an algorithm to accomplish tree exploration (with return) using O(log n)-bit memory for all n-node trees. This strengthens the result from [15], where O(log2n)-bit memory was used for tree exploration, and matches the lower bound on memory size proved there.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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