MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254745643 · doi:10.1145/512195.512197

Finding shortest paths in large network systems

2001· article· en· W4254745643 on OpenAlexaff
Edward P. F. Chan, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDijkstra's algorithmSuurballe's algorithmShortest path problemComputer sciencePathfindingYen's algorithmFloyd–Warshall algorithmShortest Path Faster AlgorithmK shortest path routingGraphA* search algorithmAlgorithmScalabilityAverage path lengthTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a disk-based algorithm for finding shortest paths in a large network system. It employs a strategy of processing the network piece by piece and is based on new algorithms for graph partitioning and for finding shortest paths that overcome the problem of existing approaches. To show that it is scalable to large network systems and is adaptable to different computing environments, seven states in Tiger/Line files are extracted as test cases and are experimented on machines with different configurations. The running time for finding the shortest path depends primarily on the power of the underlying systems. Moreover, to run the algorithm optimally, the memory requirement is not large, even for a very large network system such as the road system in several states in Tiger/Line file. To evaluate its performance, New Mexico state road system is used as the test case, and is compared with Dijkstra's algorithm. The average running time of the proposed algorithm is, in the worst case, about two and a half times slower than that of Dijkstra's algorithm; provided that in Dijkstra's algorithm, the whole graph can be fit into main memory and is already loaded in advance. If the I/O time for loading the whole graph is counted, the proposed algorithm is faster in essentially all cases.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207