MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952969041 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1509.01190

Advanced Multilevel Node Separator Algorithms

2015· preprint· en· W2952969041 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Sanders, Christian Schulz

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIterated local searchComputer scienceGraphGraph partitionAlgorithmIterated functionSeparator (oil production)Theoretical computer scienceLocal search (optimization)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A node separator of a graph is a subset S of the nodes such that removing S and its incident edges divides the graph into two disconnected components of about equal size. In this work, we introduce novel algorithms to find small node separators in large graphs. With focus on solution quality, we introduce novel flow-based local search algorithms which are integrated in a multilevel framework. In addition, we transfer techniques successfully used in the graph partitioning field. This includes the usage of edge ratings tailored to our problem to guide the graph coarsening algorithm as well as highly localized local search and iterated multilevel cycles to improve solution quality even further. Experiments indicate that flow-based local search algorithms on its own in a multilevel framework are already highly competitive in terms of separator quality. Adding additional local search algorithms further improves solution quality. Our strongest configuration almost always outperforms competing systems while on average computing 10% and 62% smaller separators than Metis and Scotch, respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.118 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207