Efficient algorithms for densest subgraph discovery
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
Densest subgraph discovery (DSD) is a fundamental problem in graph mining. It has been studied for decades, and is widely used in various areas, including network science, biological analysis, and graph databases. Given a graph G , DSD aims to find a subgraph D of G with the highest density (e.g., the number of edges over the number of vertices in D ). Because DSD is difficult to solve, we propose a new solution paradigm in this paper. Our main observation is that the densest subgraph can be accurately found through a k -core (a kind of dense subgraph of G ), with theoretical guarantees. Based on this intuition, we develop efficient exact and approximation solutions for DSD. Moreover, our solutions are able to find the densest subgraphs for a wide range of graph density definitions, including clique-based- and general pattern-based density. We have performed extensive experimental evaluation on both real and synthetic datasets. Our results show that our algorithms are up to four orders of magnitude faster than existing approaches.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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