MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783565018 · doi:10.20382/jocg.v9i1a15

Routing on the Visibility Graph

2017· preprint· en· W2783565018 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Prosenjit Bose, Matias Korman, Sander Verdonschot, André van Renssen

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersExploratory Research for Advanced TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsVisibility graphEqual-cost multi-path routingComputer scienceCombinatoricsRouting (electronic design automation)Static routingVisibilityGraphTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsComputer networkRouting protocolGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of routing on a network in the presence of line segment constraints (i.e., obstacles that edges in our network are not allowed to cross). Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points in the plane and let $S$ be a set of non-crossing line segments whose endpoints are in $P$. We present two deterministic 1-local $O(1)$-memory routing algorithms (i.e., the algorithms never look beyond the direct neighbours of the current location and store only a constant amount of additional information). These algorithms are guaranteed to find a path consisting of at most a linear number of edges between any pair of vertices of the visibility graph of $P$ subject to a set of constraints $S$. Contrary to all existing deterministic local routing algorithms, our routing algorithms do not route on a plane subgraph of the visibility graph. Additionally, we provide lower bounds on the routing ratio of any deterministic local routing algorithm on the visibility 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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207