Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a simple distributed algorithm for balancing indivisible tokens on graphs. The algorithm is completely deterministic, though it tries to imitate (and enhance) a random algorithm by keeping the accumulated rounding errors as small as possible. Our new algorithm approximates the idealized process (where the tokens are divisible) on important network topologies surprisingly closely. On d-dimensional torus graphs with n nodes it deviates from the idealized process only by an additive constant. In contrast to that, the randomized rounding approach of Friedrich and Sauerwald [8] can deviate up to Ω(polylog n) and the deterministic algorithm of Rabani, Sinclair and Wanka [23] has a deviation of Ω(n1/d). This makes our quasirandom algorithm the first known algorithm for this setting which is optimal both in time and achieved smoothness. We further show that also on the hypercube our algorithm has a smaller deviation from the idealized process than the previous algorithms. To prove these results, we derive several combinatorial and probabilistic results that we believe to be of independent interest. In particular, we show that first-passage probabilities of a random walk on a path with arbitrary weights can be expressed as a convolution of independent geometric probability distributions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".