MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164604964 · doi:10.7155/jgaa.00608

Finding a Maximum Clique in a Grounded 1-Bend String Graph

2022· article· en· W3164604964 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 Graph Algorithms and Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsString (physics)Block graphMathematicsCliqueMonotone polygonGraphDiscrete mathematicsChordal graphGeometry1-planar graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A grounded 1-bend string graph is an intersection graph of a set of polygonal lines, each with one bend, such that the lines lie above a common horizontal line $\ell$ and have exactly one end point on $\ell$. We show that the problem of finding a maximum clique in a grounded 1-bend string graph is APX-hard, even for strictly $y$-monotone strings. For general 1-bend strings, the problem remains APX-hard even if we restrict the position of the bends and end points to lie on at most three parallel horizontal lines. We give fast algorithms to compute a maximum clique for different subclasses of grounded segment graphs, which are formed by restricting the strings to various forms of $L$-shapes.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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