MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256347034 · doi:10.1002/net.20318

Improper coloring of unit disk graphs

2009· article· en· W4256347034 on OpenAlexafffund
Frédéric Havet, Ross J. Kang, Jean‐Sébastien Sereni

Bibliographic record

VenueNetworks · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCombinatoricsVertex (graph theory)Complete coloringMathematicsIndifference graphEdge coloringChromatic scaleGraph coloringDiscrete mathematicsChordal graphGraphInterval graphComputer scienceInterval (graph theory)Unit disk1-planar graphLine graphGraph power

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Motivated by a satellite communications problem, we consider a generalized coloring problem on unit disk graphs. A coloring is k‐improper if no more than k neighbors of every vertex have the same colour as that assigned to the vertex. The k‐improper chromatic number χk(G) is the least number of colors needed in a k‐improper coloring of a graph G. The main subject of this work is analyzing the complexity of computing χk for the class of unit disk graphs and some related classes, e.g., hexagonal graphs and interval graphs. We show NP‐completeness in many restricted cases and also provide both positive and negative approximability results. Because of the challenging nature of this topic, many seemingly simple questions remain: for example, it remains open to determine the complexity of computing χk for unit interval graphs. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. NETWORKS, 2009

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations24
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetworksSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207