Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual symposium on Computational geometry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume collects the research papers, short descriptions of the video presentations, and summaries of the two invited talks, that together constitute the technical proceedings of the 26th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG 2010), held June 13-16, at Snowbird, Utah, USA. A total of 145 papers were received in response to the call for papers. The program committee reviewed the submissions carefully, with a distributed effort that included expert input from both members of the program committee and a host of external reviewers (acknowledged herein); the substantial help provided by the external reviewers, under serious time constraints, is very gratefully acknowledged. The program committee deliberated electronically from January 25 to February 13; based on reviews and discussions, a total of 47 papers were selected for presentation at the symposium. The on-line review process, and the electronic discussion and decision process were all conducted with the aid of the free conference management system EasyChair. The papers presented in these proceedings generally represent preliminary, often abstracted, results of ongoing research. We anticipate that most of these papers will eventually appear in a more fully developed form in refereed journals. In addition to the technical papers, seven videos were received in response to the call for videos and multimedia submissions. Five videos were accepted by the video and multimedia committee for presentation at the symposium. The web proceedings showcase the revised videos at http://www.computational-geometry.org/SoCG-videos/socg10video/.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it