MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125795534

Characterizations of the cycle-complete and folk solutions for minimum cost spanning tree problems

2013· preprint· en· W3125795534 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian Trudeau

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2013
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGame Theory and Voting Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCore (optical fiber)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionIndependence (probability theory)Tree (set theory)Steiner tree problemComputer scienceMathematical optimizationProperty (philosophy)PiecewiseSpanning treeSelection (genetic algorithm)MathematicsCombinatoricsArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimum cost spanning tree problems connect agents efficiently to a source when agents are located at different points and the cost of using an edge is fixed. The folk and cycle-complete cost sharing solutions always offer core allocations. We provide similar characterizations for both. A new property is based on the following observation: when all agents have the same cost to connect to the source, we can connect one of them to the source then connect all other agents to him, as if he was the source. Cost sharing should also be done in these two steps. We also use some common properties: Core Selection, Piecewise Linearity and an independence property. The solutions are differentiated by properties that apply when the cheapest edge to the source gets cheaper. Either the savings are equally distributed among all agents (folk) or the agent on that edge gets all of the savings (cycle-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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicGame Theory and Voting SystemsFrench-language works237,207