MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966984161

Surface Areas of Some Interconnection Networks

2019· dissertation· en· W2966984161 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fatemeh Salahi

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBrock University
KeywordsInterconnectionComputer scienceComputer networkComputer architecture
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An interesting property of an interconnected network (G) is the number of nodes at distance i from an arbitrary processor (u), namely the node centered surface area. This is an important property of a network due to its applications in various fields of study.
\nIn this research, we investigate on the surface area of two important interconnection networks, (n, k)-arrangement graphs and (n, k)-star graphs.
\nAbundant works have been done to achieve a formula for the surface area of these two classes of graphs, but in general, it is not trivial to find an algorithm to compute the surface area of such graphs in polynomial time or to find an explicit formula with polynomially many terms in regards to the graph's parameters. Among these studies, the most efficient formula in terms of computational complexity is the one that Portier and Vaughan proposed which allows us to compute the surface area of a special case of (n, k)-arrangement and (n, k)-star graphs when k = n-1, in linear time which is a tremendous improvement over the naive solution with complexity order of O(n * n!). The recurrence we propose here has the linear computational complexity as well, but for a much wider family of graphs, namely A(n, k) for any arbitrary n and k in their defined range. Additionally, for (n, k)-star graphs we prove properties that can be used to achieve a simple recurrence for its surface area.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207