MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964203300 · doi:10.2140/involve.2019.12.1423

Total Roman domination edge-critical graphs

2019· article· en· W2964203300 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInvolve a Journal of Mathematics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVertex (graph theory)Dominating setGraphDomination analysisMinimum weightInduced subgraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A total Roman dominating function on a graph [math] is a function [math] such that every vertex [math] with [math] is adjacent to some vertex [math] with [math] , and the subgraph of [math] induced by the set of all vertices [math] such that [math] has no isolated vertices. The weight of [math] is [math] . The total Roman domination number [math] is the minimum weight of a total Roman dominating function on [math] . A graph [math] is [math] - [math] -edge-critical if [math] for every edge [math] , and [math] - [math] -edge-supercritical if it is [math] - [math] -edge-critical and [math] for every edge [math] . We present some basic results on [math] -edge-critical graphs and characterize certain classes of [math] -edge-critical graphs. In addition, we show that, when [math] is small, there is a connection between [math] - [math] -edge-critical graphs and graphs which are critical with respect to the domination and total domination numbers.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.283 · 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