MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963269633 · doi:10.1002/jgt.22929

A new graph parameter to measure linearity

2023· article· en· W2963269633 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre Charbit, Michel Habib, Lalla Mouatadid, Reza Naserasr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Graph Theory · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsChordal graphIndifference graphDiscrete mathematicsInterval graphPathwidthLexicographical orderCographSplit graphVertex (graph theory)ConjectureMaximal independent setGraph1-planar graphLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Consider a sequence of Lexicographic Breadth‐First‐Search vertex orderings where each ordering is used to break ties for . Since the total number of vertex orderings of a finite graph is finite, this sequence must end in a cycle of vertex orderings. The possible length of this cycle is the main subject of this work. Intuitively, we prove for graphs with a known notion of linearity (e.g., interval graphs with their interval representation on the real line), this cycle cannot be too big, no matter which vertex ordering we start with. More precisely, it was conjectured by Dusart and Habib that for cocomparability graphs, the size of this cycle is always 2, independent of the starting order. Furthermore Stacho asked whether for arbitrary graphs, the size of such a cycle is always bounded by the asteroidal number of the graph. In this work, while we answer this latter question negatively, we provide support for the conjecture on cocomparability graphs by proving it for the subclass of domino‐free cocomparability graphs. This subclass contains cographs, proper interval, interval and cobipartite graphs. We also provide simpler independent proofs for each of these cases which lead to stronger results on this subclasses.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.274 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Graph TheorySame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207