MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736876508 · doi:10.46298/dmtcs.3396

The Windy Postman Problem on Series-Parallel Graphs

2005· article· en· W2736876508 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooUniversidad Autónoma Metropolitana
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsEulerian pathConjecturePolyhedronGraphDiscrete mathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The windy postman problem is the NP-hard problem of finding the minimum cost of a tour traversing all edges of an undirected graph, where the cost of traversal of an edge depends on the direction. Given an undirected graph $G$, we consider the polyhedron $O(G)$ induced by the linear programming relaxation of a well-known integer programming formulation of the problem. We say that $G$ is windy postman perfect if $O(G)$ is integral. There exists a polynomial-time algorithm, based on the ellipsoid method, to solve the windy postman problem for the class of windy postman perfect graphs. Eulerian graphs and trees are windy postman perfect. By considering a family of polyhedra related to $O(G)$, we prove that series-parallel graphs are windy postman perfect, therefore solving a conjecture of [Win1987a].

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0070.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.282
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