Network farthest-point diagrams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consider the continuum of points along the edges of a network, i.e., an undirected graph with positive edge weights. We measure distance between these points in terms of the shortest path distance along the network, known as the network distance. Within this metric space, we study farthest points. We introduce network farthest-point diagrams, which capture how the farthest points---and the distance to them---change as we traverse the network. We preprocess a network G such that, when given a query point q on G, we can quickly determine the farthest point(s) from q in G as well as the farthest distance from q in G. Furthermore, we introduce a data structure supporting queries for the parts of the network that are farther away from q than some threshold R > 0, where R is part of the query. We also introduce the minimum eccentricity feed-link problem defined as follows. Given a network G with geometric edge weights and a point p that is not on G, connect p to a point q on G with a straight line segment pq, called a feed-link, such that the largest network distance from p to any point in the resulting network is minimized. We solve the minimum eccentricity feed-link problem using eccentricity diagrams. In addition, we provide a data structure for the query version, where the network G is fixed and a query consists of the point p.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".