MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952752670 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1605.03203

Approximating Min-Cost Chain-Constrained Spanning Trees: A Reduction from Weighted to Unweighted Problems

2016· preprint· en· W2952752670 on OpenAlexaff
André Linhares, Chaitanya Swamy

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatroidMathematicsRoundingCombinatoricsSpanning treeDegree (music)Approximation algorithmConstant (computer programming)Mathematical optimizationMinimum spanning treeReduction (mathematics)Lagrangian relaxationDiscrete mathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the {\em min-cost chain-constrained spanning-tree} (abbreviated \mcst) problem: find a min-cost spanning tree in a graph subject to degree constraints on a nested family of node sets. We devise the {\em first} polytime algorithm that finds a spanning tree that (i) violates the degree constraints by at most a constant factor {\em and} (ii) whose cost is within a constant factor of the optimum. Previously, only an algorithm for {\em unweighted} \cst was known \cite{olver}, which satisfied (i) but did not yield any cost bounds. This also yields the first result that obtains an $O(1)$-factor for {\em both} the cost approximation and violation of degree constraints for any spanning-tree problem with general degree bounds on node sets, where an edge participates in a super-constant number of degree constraints. A notable feature of our algorithm is that we {\em reduce} \mcst to unweighted \cst (and then utilize \cite{olver}) via a novel application of {\em Lagrangian duality} to simplify the {\em cost structure} of the underlying problem and obtain a decomposition into certain uniform-cost subproblems. We show that this Lagrangian-relaxation based idea is in fact applicable more generally and, for any cost-minimization problem with packing side-constraints, yields a reduction from the weighted to the unweighted problem. We believe that this reduction is of independent interest. As another application of our technique, we consider the {\em $k$-budgeted matroid basis} problem, where we build upon a recent rounding algorithm of \cite{BansalN16} to obtain an improved $n^{O(k^{1.5}/ε)}$-time algorithm that returns a solution that satisfies (any) one of the budget constraints exactly and incurs a $(1+ε)$-violation of the other budget constraints.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.151 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207