MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035268094 · doi:10.55016/ojs/cdm.v18i1.71282

Confining the robber on cographs

2023· article· en· W3035268094 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Masood Masjoody

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Discrete Mathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a game of Cops and Robbers on graphs, usually the cops' objective is to capture the robber---a situation which the robber wants to avoid invariably. In this paper, we begin with introducing the notions of trapping and confining the robber and discussing their relations with capturing the robber. Our goal is to study the confinement of the robber on graphs that are free of a fixed path as an induced subgraph. We present some necessary conditions for graphs $G$ not containing the path on $k$ vertices (referred to as $P_k$-free graphs) for some $k\ge 4$, so that $k-3$ cops do not have a strategy to capture or confine the robber on $G$ (Propositions 2.1, 2.3). We then show that for planar cographs and planar $P_5$-free graphs the confining cop number is at most one and two, respectively (Corollary 2.4). We also show that the number of vertices of a connected cograph on which one cop does not have a strategy to confine the robber has a tight lower bound of eight. Moreover, we explore the effects of twin operations---which are well known to provide a characterization of cographs---on the number of cops required to capture or confine the robber on cographs. Finally, we pose two conjectures on confining the robber on $P_5$-free graphs and the smallest planar graph of confining cop number of three.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to Discrete MathematicsSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207