MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978598014 · doi:10.1002/jgt.22499

The class of (P7,C4,C5)‐free graphs: Decomposition, algorithms, and χ‐boundedness

2019· article· en· W2978598014 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathie Cameron, Shenwei Huang, Irena Penev, Vaidy Sivaraman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Graph Theory · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsSplit graphChordal graphInduced pathDiscrete mathematicsCographInduced subgraphIndependent setIndifference graphPathwidthBlock graphPerfect graphModular decomposition1-planar graphGraphLongest path problemLine graphVertex (graph theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As usual, () denotes the path on vertices, and () denotes the cycle on vertices. For a family of graphs, we say that a graph is ‐free if no induced subgraph of is isomorphic to any graph in . We present a decomposition theorem for the class of ‐free graphs; in fact, we give a complete structural characterization of ‐free graphs that do not admit a clique‐cutset. We use this decomposition theorem to show that the class of ‐free graphs is ‐bounded by a linear function (more precisely, every ‐free graph satisfies ). We also use the decomposition theorem to construct an algorithm for the minimum coloring problem, an algorithm for the maximum weight stable set problem, and an algorithm for the maximum weight clique problem for this class, where denotes the number of vertices and the number of edges of the input graph.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Graph TheorySame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207