Approximating Dominating Set on Intersection Graphs of Rectangles and L-frames
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the Minimum Dominating Set (MDS) problem on the intersection graphs of geometric objects. Even for simple and widely-used geometric objects such as rectangles, no sub-logarithmic approximation is known for the problem and (perhaps surprisingly) the problem is NP-hard even when all the rectangles are "anchored" at a diagonal line with slope -1 (Pandit, CCCG 2017). In this paper, we first show that for any $ε>0$, there exists a $(2+ε)$-approximation algorithm for the MDS problem on "diagonal-anchored" rectangles, providing the first $O(1)$-approximation for the problem on a non-trivial subclass of rectangles. It is not hard to see that the MDS problem on "diagonal-anchored" rectangles is the same as the MDS problem on "diagonal-anchored" L-frames: the union of a vertical and a horizontal line segment that share an endpoint. As such, we also obtain a $(2+ε)$-approximation for the problem with "diagonal-anchored" L-frames. On the other hand, we show that the problem is APX-hard in case the input L-frames intersect the diagonal, or the horizontal segments of the L-frames intersect a vertical line. However, as we show, the problem is linear-time solvable in case the L-frames intersect a vertical as well as a horizontal line. Finally, we consider the MDS problem in the so-called "edge intersection model" and obtain a number of results, answering two questions posed by Mehrabi (WAOA 2017).
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".