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 OpenAlexafffund

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInvolve a Journal of MathematicsSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207