Vertex ordering with optimal number of adjacent predecessors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the complexity of the selection of a graph discretization order with a stepwise linear cost function. Finding such vertex ordering has been proved to be an essential step to solve discretizable distance geometry problems (DDGPs). DDGPs constitute a class of graph realization problems where the vertices can be ordered in such a way that the search space of possible positions becomes discrete, usually represented by a binary tree. In particular, it is useful to find discretization orders that minimize an indicator of the size of the search tree. Our stepwise linear cost function generalizes this situation and allows to discriminate the vertices into three categories depending on the number of adjacent predecessors of each vertex in the order and on two parameters K and U. We provide a complete study of NP-completeness for fixed values of K and U. Our main result is that the problem is NP-complete in general for all values of K and U such that U ≥ K + 1 and U ≥ 2. A consequence of this result is that the minimization of vertices with exactly K adjacent predecessors in a discretization order is also NP-complete.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".