On Planar Greedy Drawings of 3-Connected Planar Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A graph drawing is $\textit{greedy}$ if, for every ordered pair of vertices $(x,y)$, there is a path from $x$ to $y$ such that the Euclidean distance to $y$ decreases monotonically at every vertex of the path. Greedy drawings support a simple geometric routing scheme, in which any node that has to send a packet to a destination "greedily" forwards the packet to any neighbor that is closer to the destination than itself, according to the Euclidean distance in the drawing. In a greedy drawing such a neighbor always exists and hence this routing scheme is guaranteed to succeed. In 2004 Papadimitriou and Ratajczak stated two conjectures related to greedy drawings. The $\textit{greedy embedding conjecture}$ states that every $3$-connected planar graph admits a greedy drawing. The $\textit{convex greedy embedding conjecture}$ asserts that every $3$-connected planar graph admits a planar greedy drawing in which the faces are delimited by convex polygons. In 2008 the greedy embedding conjecture was settled in the positive by Leighton and Moitra. In this paper we prove that every $3$-connected planar graph admits a $\textit{planar}$ greedy drawing. Apart from being a strengthening of Leighton and Moitra's result, this theorem constitutes a natural intermediate step towards a proof of the convex greedy embedding conjecture.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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".