Analysis of Sombor and Harmonic Indices of Thorn Cog-Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the realm of chemical graph theory, a topological index is a numerical parameter derived from a molecular graph.This index offers a streamlined approach to numerically calculate and compare various physico-chemical properties of chemical compounds, such as melting point, boiling point, viscosity, size, shape, atom count, bond strength, enthalpy, and geometric characteristics.Traditional scientific exploration of these properties, conducted in a laboratory setting, is often timeintensive, costly, and demands expertise in the respective field.Chemical graph theory provides a more cost-effective and straightforward solution, enabling the correlation of topological indices with chemistry.This approach allows for the computational analysis of any chemical species using mathematical tools, circumventing the need for laboratory-based experiments.This approach offers considerable benefits in chemical science, as it employs mathematical and theoretical methods to estimate a molecule's physico-chemical properties.The primary objective of this paper is to elucidate the correlation between thorn graphs and topological indices, utilizing the methods of vertex degrees and edge partitioning.The paper conducts a rigorous analysis of thorn graphs using mathematical calculations, deriving the relationship between the indices.These indices play a pivotal role in a diverse array of research areas, including chemoinformatics, pharmaceutical industry applications, and toxicity prediction among others.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".