On Essentially 4-Edge-Connected Cubic Bricks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lovász (1987) proved that every matching covered graph $G$ may be uniquely decomposed into a list of bricks (nonbipartite) and braces (bipartite); we let $b(G)$ denote the number of bricks. An edge $e$ is removable if $G-e$ is also matching covered; furthermore, $e$ is $b$-invariant if $b(G-e)=1$, and $e$ is quasi-$b$-invariant if $b(G-e)=2$. (Each edge of the Petersen graph is quasi-$b$-invariant.) A brick $G$ is near-bipartite if it has a pair of edges $\{e,f\}$ so that $G-e-f$ is matching covered and bipartite; such a pair $\{e,f\}$ is a removable doubleton. (Each of $K_4$ and the triangular prism $\overline{C_6}$ has three removable doubletons.) Carvalho, Lucchesi and Murty (2002) proved a conjecture of Lovász which states that every brick, distinct from $K_4$, $\overline{C_6}$ and the Petersen graph, has a $b$-invariant edge. A cubic graph is essentially $4$-edge-connected if it is $2$-edge-connected and if its only $3$-cuts are the trivial ones; it is well-known that each such graph is either a brick or a brace; we provide a graph-theoretical proof of this fact. We prove that if $G$ is any essentially $4$-edge-connected cubic brick then its edge-set may be partitioned into three (possibly empty) sets: (i) edges that participate in a removable doubleton, (ii) $b$-invariant edges, and (iii) quasi-$b$-invariant edges; our Main Theorem states that if $G$ has two adjacent quasi-$b$-invariant edges, say $e_1$ and $e_2$, then either $G$ is the Petersen graph or the (near-bipartite) Cubeplex graph, or otherwise, each edge of $G$ (distinct from $e_1$ and $e_2$) is $b$-invariant. As a corollary, we deduce that each essentially $4$-edge-connected cubic non-near-bipartite brick $G$, distinct from the Petersen graph, has at least $|V(G)|$ $b$-invariant edges.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".