MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761333931 · doi:10.1002/jcd.21586

On the Hamilton–Waterloo problem with odd cycle lengths

2017· article· en· W2761333931 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Designs · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicgraph theory and CDMA systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaIstituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica "Francesco Severi"
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsLexicographical orderGraphGraph factorizationComplete graphFactorizationHamiltonian pathDiscrete mathematicsLine graphGraph powerAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Let denote the complete graph if v is odd and , the complete graph with the edges of a 1‐factor removed, if v is even. Given nonnegative integers , the Hamilton–Waterloo problem asks for a 2‐factorization of into α ‐factors and β ‐factors, with a ‐factor of being a spanning 2‐regular subgraph whose components are ℓ‐cycles. Clearly, , , and are necessary conditions. In this paper, we extend a previous result by the same authors and show that for any odd the above necessary conditions are sufficient, except possibly when , or when . Note that in the case where v is odd, M and N must be odd. If M and N are odd but v is even, we also show sufficiency but with further possible exceptions. In addition, we provide results on 2‐factorizations of the complete equipartite graph and the lexicographic product of a cycle with the empty graph.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.197 · 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