MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788555957 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v32i1.12076

A Recursive Algorithm to Generate Balanced Weekend Tournaments

2018· article· en· W2788555957 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Hoshino

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTournamentLeagueScheduleCorollaryScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceDirected graphHamiltonian pathSimple (philosophy)MathematicsGraphMathematical economicsOperations researchAlgorithmCombinatoricsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we construct a Balanced Weekend Tournament, motivated by the real-life problem of scheduling an n-team double round-robin season schedule for a Canadian university soccer league. In this 6-team league, games are only played on Saturdays and Sundays, with the condition that no team has two road games on any weekend. The implemented regular-season schedule for n = 6 was best-possible, but failed to meet an important "compactness" criterion, as the 10-game tournament required more than five weekends to complete. The motivation for this paper was to determine whether an optimal season schedule, satisfying all of the league's constraints on compact balanced play, could be constructed for sports leagues with n > 6 teams. We present a simple recursive algorithm to answer this question for all even n > 6. As a corollary, our construction gives us an explicit solution to a challenging and well-known graph theory question, namely the problem of decomposing the complete directed graph K*2m into 2m–1 directed Hamiltonian cycles of length 2m.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicScheduling and Timetabling SolutionsFrench-language works237,207