MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947767361

On Combinatorial Depth Measures.

2014· article· en· W2947767361 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Durocher, Robert Fraser, Alexandre Leblanc, Jason Morrison, Matthew Skala

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultisetCharacterization (materials science)Set (abstract data type)CombinatoricsPlane (geometry)MathematicsPoint (geometry)Combinatorial methodFunction (biology)Discrete mathematicsAlgorithmComputer sciencePhysicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a set P = {p1,..., pn} of points and a point q in the plane, we define a function ψ(q) that provides a combinatorial characterization of the multiset of values {|P ∩Hi|}, where for each i ∈ {1,..., n}, Hi is the open half-plane determined by q and pi. We introduce two new natural measures of depth, perihedral depth and eutomic depth, and we show how to express these and the well-known simplicial and Tukey depths concisely in terms of ψ(q). The perihedral and eutomic depths of q with respect to P correspond respectively to the num-ber of subsets of P whose convex hull contains q, and the number of combinatorially distinct bisections of P determined by a line through q. We present algorithms to compute the depth of an arbitrary query point in O(n log n) time and medians (deepest points) with re-spect to these depth measures in O(n4) and O(n8/3) time respectively. For comparison, these results match or slightly improve on the corresponding best-known running times for simplicial depth, whose definition in-volves similar combinatorial complexity. 1

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207