Minimum-Cost Coverage of Point Sets by Disks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a class of geometric facility location problems in which the goal is to determine a set X of disks given by their centers (t_j) and radii (r_j) that cover a given set of demand points Y in the plane at the smallest possible cost. We consider cost functions of the form sum_j f(r_j), where f(r)=r^alpha is the cost of transmission to radius r. Special cases arise for alpha=1 (sum of radii) and alpha=2 (total area); power consumption models in wireless network design often use an exponent alpha>2. Different scenarios arise according to possible restrictions on the transmission centers t_j, which may be constrained to belong to a given discrete set or to lie on a line, etc. We obtain several new results, including (a) exact and approximation algorithms for selecting transmission points t_j on a given line in order to cover demand points Y in the plane; (b) approximation algorithms (and an algebraic intractability result) for selecting an optimal line on which to place transmission points to cover Y; (c) a proof of NP-hardness for a discrete set of transmission points in the plane and any fixed alpha>1; and (d) a polynomial-time approximation scheme for the problem of computing a minimum cost covering tour (MCCT), in which the total cost is a linear combination of the transmission cost for the set of disks and the length of a tour/path that connects the centers of the disks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it