MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015867196 · doi:10.1002/net.21938

Rational roots of all‐terminal reliability

2020· article· en· W3015867196 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason I. Brown, Corey D. C. DeGagné

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsTerminal (telecommunication)Spanning treeRational numberModuliClass (philosophy)Reliability (semiconductor)Discrete mathematicsGraphOrder (exchange)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Given a connected graph G whose vertices are perfectly reliable and whose edges each fail independently with probability q ∈ [0, 1] , the ( all‐terminal ) reliability of G is the probability that the resulting subgraph of operational edges contains a spanning tree (this probability is always a polynomial in q ). The location of the roots of reliability polynomials has been well studied, with particular interest in finding those with the largest moduli. In this paper, we will discuss a related problem—among all reliability polynomials of graphs on n vertices, what can we say about the rational roots? We prove that (for n ≥ 2 ), the rational roots are −1, − 1/2, − 1/3,…, − 1/( n − 1), 1 . Moreover, we show that for n ≥ 3 , the root of minimum modulus among all graphs of order n is rational, and determine all roots of smallest moduli and the corresponding graphs. Finally, we provide the first nontrivial mathematical property that distinguishes, via reliability, the class of simple graphs (i.e., those without loops and multiple edges) from that of graphs in general.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.192 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetworksSame topicReliability and Maintenance OptimizationFrench-language works237,207