MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950490117 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1602.06040

The geometry of homothetic covering and illumination

2016· preprint· en· W2950490117 on OpenAlexaff
Károly Bezdek, M. Ali Khan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomothetic transformationConjectureDiscrete geometryRegular polygonConvex bodyBoundary (topology)GeometryConvex geometryMathematicsComputer scienceConvex analysisPure mathematicsConvex hullMathematical analysisConvex optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At a first glance, the problem of illuminating the boundary of a convex body by external light sources and the problem of covering a convex body by its smaller positive homothetic copies appear to be quite different. They are in fact two sides of the same coin and give rise to one of the important longstanding open problems in discrete geometry, namely, the Illumination Conjecture. In this paper, we survey the activity in the areas of discrete geometry, computational geometry and geometric analysis motivated by this conjecture. Special care is taken to include the recent advances that are not covered by the existing surveys. We also include some of our recent results related to these problems and describe two new approaches -- one conventional and the other computer-assisted -- to make progress on the illumination problem. Some open problems and conjectures are also presented.

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)0.003
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 score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.124 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicPoint processes and geometric inequalitiesFrench-language works237,207