MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950071671 · doi:10.82308/49985

The least-used direction pivot rule on acyclic unique sink orientations

2011· article· en· W2950071671 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Theresa Deering

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVancouver Island UniversityMinistère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’ExportationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsCombinatoricsDirected acyclic graphMathematicsExponential function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The least-used direction (LUD) rule is one of a class of largely unanalyzed pivot rules - the history-based rules. History-based pivot rules guide the progression of edge following algorithms like the Simplex method. This thesis investigates the problem of finding an exponential length LUD path on a particular kind of digraph known as an acyclic unique sink orientation of a hypercube (AUSO). In addition, a survey of six well-known history-based pivot rule and examples to illustrate their independence is given. The Fibonacci construction is introduced as a potential way of creating families of AUSOs that allows for exponential LUD paths. The most straight-forward application of this technique is unsuccessful, but there is room for more exploration. An exponential lower bound is given for thenumber of times the least-used direction is used by a Hamiltonian path following the related history-based Zadeh's rule. This result shows that the number of times each direction is used grows at a similar rate and is thus relatively balanced.

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)0.006
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207