Engineering Data Reduction for Nested Dissection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many applications rely on time-intensive matrix operations, such as factorization, which can be sped up significantly for large sparse matrices by interpreting the matrix as a sparse graph and computing a node ordering that minimizes the so-called fill-in. In this paper, we engineer new data reduction rules for the minimum fill-in problem, which significantly reduce the size of the graph while producing an equivalent (or near-equivalent) instance. By applying both new and existing data reduction rules exhaustively before nested dissection, we obtain improved quality and at the same time large improvements in running time on a variety of instances. Our overall algorithm outperforms the state-of-the-art significantly: it not only yields better elimination orders, but it does so significantly faster than previously possible. For example, on road networks, where nested dissection algorithms are typically used as a preprocessing step for shortest path computations, our algorithms are on average six times faster than Metis while computing orderings with less fill-in.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 it