MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380990053 · doi:10.37236/11623

Induced Subgraphs and Tree Decompositions IV. (Even Hole, Diamond, Pyramid)-Free Graphs

2023· article· en· W4380990053 on OpenAlexafffund
Tara Abrishami, Maria Chudnovsky, Sepehr Hajebi, Sophie Spirkl

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsTree (set theory)Pyramid (geometry)DiamondDiscrete mathematicsGeometryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hole in a graph $G$ is an induced cycle of length at least four, and an even hole is a hole of even length. The diamond is the graph obtained from the complete graph $K_4$ by removing an edge. A pyramid is a graph consisting of a vertex $a$ called the apex and a triangle $\{b_1, b_2, b_3\}$ called the base, and three paths $P_i$ from $a$ to $b_i$ for $1 \leq i \leq 3$, all of length at least one, such that for $i \neq j$, the only edge between $P_i \setminus \{a\}$ and $P_j \setminus \{a\}$ is $b_ib_j$, and at most one of $P_1$, $P_2$, and $P_3$ has length exactly one. For a family $\mathcal{H}$ of graphs, we say a graph $G$ is $\mathcal{H}$-free if no induced subgraph of $G$ is isomorphic to a member of $\mathcal{H}$. Cameron, da Silva, Huang, and Vušković proved that (even hole, triangle)-free graphs have treewidth at most five, which motivates studying the treewidth of even-hole-free graphs of larger clique number. Sintiari and Trotignon provided a construction of (even hole, pyramid, $K_4$)-free graphs of arbitrarily large treewidth. Here, we show that for every $t$, (even hole, pyramid, diamond, $K_t$)-free graphs have bounded treewidth. The graphs constructed by Sintiari and Trotignon contain diamonds, so our result is sharp in the sense that it is false if we do not exclude diamonds. Our main result is in fact more general, that treewidth is bounded in graphs excluding certain wheels and three-path-configurations, diamonds, and a fixed complete graph. The proof uses “non-crossing decompositions” methods similar to those in previous papers in this series. In previous papers, however, bounded degree was a necessary condition to prove bounded treewidth. The result of this paper is the first to use the method of “non-crossing decompositions” to prove bounded treewidth in a graph class of unbounded maximum degree.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207