MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963356118 · doi:10.2298/fil1601169a

On the domination polynomials of friendship graphs

2016· article· en· W2963356118 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Object Identifier (DOI) Repository Serbia (National Library of Serbia) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsGraphDiscrete mathematicsLimitingFriendship graphVoltage graphLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let G be a simple graph of order n. The domination polynomial of G is the\n polynomial D(G,x)= nΣi=0 d(G,i)xi, where d(G,i) is the number of dominating\n sets of G of size i. Let n be any positive integer and Fn be the Friendship\n graph with 2n + 1 vertices and 3n edges, formed by the join of K1 with nK2.\n We study the domination polynomials of this family of graphs, and in\n particular examine the domination roots of the family, and find the limiting\n curve for the roots. We also show that for every n > 2, Fn is not D-unique,\n that is, there is another non-isomorphic graph with the same domination\n polynomial. Also we construct some families of graphs whose real domination\n roots are only -2 and 0. Finally, we conclude by discussing the domination\n polynomials of a related family of graphs, the n-book graphs Bn, formed by\n joining n copies of the cycle graph C4 with a common edge.

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 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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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