MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951184112 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13352

Implementation of Minimum Edge Constraints Sets for Proximity Graphs

2018· dissertation· en· W2951184112 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Duong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelaunay triangulationComputer scienceEdge contractionEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionGraphSpanning treeConstrained Delaunay triangulationLine graphTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsCombinatoricsVoltage graphArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For certain edge-constrained proximity algorithms, not every edge of the resulting graph needs to be explicitly stored. This has implications for graph compression. We examine the application and runtime performance on minimum edge-constrained algorithms for three proximity graph types: Delaunay triangulation, Gabriel graph and minimum spanning tree. Implementation details on these algorithms are given, their performance in both large real world datasets and randomized datasets are evaluated. In addition, their compression metrics, the number of edges that are reduced from the constraint edge set, are investigated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207