MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386857812 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2023.08.244

Graphs with constant balancing number

2023· article· en· W4386857812 on OpenAlexaff
Yair Caro, Ileana González-Escalante, Adriana Hansberg, Mariel Jácome, Tonatiuh Matos Wiederhold, Amanda Montejano

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsConstant (computer programming)Edge coloringGraphGraph coloringComputer scienceUpper and lower boundsMathematicsExponential functionDiscrete mathematicsLine graphGraph power

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the existence of unavoidable 2-edge-colored patterns in edge-colorings of the complete graph. We are interested in how these patterns change as the densities of the color classes change. A graph is called balanceable if it can be found, with half its edges in one color and half of them in the other, in any 2-edge-coloring of Kn with sufficiently many edges in each color class and n large enough. The balancing number bal(n,G) of a balanceable graph G is the maximum number m of edges such that there is a coloring of Kn with m edges in one color class without having a balanced copy of G. Equivalently, any 2-edge-coloring of Kn with more than bal(n,G) edges in each color contains a balanced copy of G. Graphs with constant (not depending on n) balancing number have been previously characterized. We give a new proof of such characterization that allows us not only to understand in a deeper way the structure of the graphs with constant balancing number but also to show that bal(n,G) is quadratic on the number of edges of G, a bound that differs substantially from the previous known that was exponential.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207