MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Odd harmonious labeling on squid graph and double squid graph

2020· article· en· W3036828194 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Labeling and Dimension Problems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsGraphVertex (graph theory)Injective functionMathematicsWindmill graphWheel graphDiscrete mathematicsGraph powerLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An injective function f from set of vertices in graph G to a set of {0,1,…,| E | − 1} is called an odd harmonious labeling if the function f induced the edge function f * from the set of edges of G to a set of odd positive integer number {1,3,5,…,2| E | − 1} with f *( xy ) = f ( x ) + f ( y ) for every edge xy in E. Graph that has an odd harmonious labeling is called odd harmonious graph. The squid graph T n,k is a graph which is obtained from a cycle C n and we add k pendant to one vertex of the cycle. It is known that C n is an odd harmonious graph if and only if n = 0 mod 4. However, by adding at least one pendant in the cycle graph, we can label the new graph odd harmoniously for all even number of vertices. In this paper, we showed that the graph T n,k and T 2 n,k are an odd harmonious graph, for n = 0 (mod 2), n ≥ 4 and k ≥ 1. The construction of the odd harmonious labeling of the graph T n,k and T 2 n,k are inspired by the odd harmonious labeling of C n for n = 0(mod 4).

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.196 · 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