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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A $3$-connected graph $G$ is a brick if, for any two vertices $u$ and $v$, the graph $G-\{u,v\}$ has a perfect matching. Deleting an edge $e$ from a brick $G$ results in a graph with zero, one or two vertices of degree two. The bicontraction of a vertex of degree two consists of contracting the two edges incident with it; and the retract of $G-e$ is the graph $J$ obtained from it by bicontracting all its vertices of degree two. An edge $e$ is thin if $J$ is also a brick. Carvalho, Lucchesi and Murty [How to build a brick, Discrete Mathematics 306 (2006), 2383-2410] showed that every brick, distinct from $K_4$, the triangular prism $\overline{C_6}$ and the Petersen graph, has a thin edge. Their theorem yields a generation procedure for bricks, using which they showed that every simple planar solid brick is an odd wheel. A brick $G$ is near-bipartite if it has a pair of edges $α$ and $β$ such that $G-\{α,β\}$ is bipartite and matching covered; examples are $K_4$ and $\overline{C_6}$. The significance of near-bipartite graphs arises from the theory of ear decompositions of matching covered graphs. The object of this paper is to establish a generation procedure which is specific to the class of near-bipartite bricks. In particular, we prove that if $G$ is any near-bipartite brick, distinct from $K_4$ and $\overline{C_6}$, then $G$ has a thin edge $e$ so that the retract $J$ of $G-e$ is also near-bipartite. In a subsequent work, with Marcelo H. de Carvalho, we use the results of this paper to prove a generation theorem for simple near-bipartite bricks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
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 it