MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951279353 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1809.10531

Closest-Pair Queries in Fat Rectangles

2018· preprint· en· W2951279353 on OpenAlexaff
Sang Won Bae, Michiel Smid

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRectangleCombinatoricsBinary logarithmMathematicsData structureSet (abstract data type)Range (aeronautics)Time complexityRange query (database)Plane (geometry)Log-log plotDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceSargableGeometrySearch engineInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the range closest pair problem, we want to construct a data structure storing a set $S$ of $n$ points in the plane, such that for any axes-parallel query rectangle $R$, the closest pair in the set $R \cap S$ can be reported. The currently best result for this problem is by Xue et al.~(SoCG 2018). Their data structure has size $O(n \log^2 n)$ and query time $O(\log^2 n)$. We show that a data structure of size $O(n \log n)$ can be constructed in $O(n \log n)$ time, such that queries can be answered in $O(\log n + f \log f)$ time, where $f$ is the aspect ratio of $R$. Thus, for fat query rectangles, the query time is $O(\log n)$. This result is obtained by reducing the range closest pair problem to standard range searching problems on the points of $S$.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.012
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.122 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207