Maximum Bipartite Subgraphs of Geometric Intersection Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the Maximum Bipartite Subgraph ([Formula: see text]) problem, which is defined as follows. Given a set [Formula: see text] of [Formula: see text] geometric objects in the plane, we want to compute a maximum-size subset [Formula: see text] such that the intersection graph of the objects in [Formula: see text] is bipartite. We first give an [Formula: see text]-time algorithm that computes an almost optimal solution for the problem on circular-arc graphs. We show that the [Formula: see text] problem is [Formula: see text]-hard on geometric graphs for which the maximum independent set is [Formula: see text]-hard (hence, it is [Formula: see text]-hard even on unit squares and unit disks). On the other hand, we give a [Formula: see text] for the problem on unit squares and unit disks. Moreover, we show fast approximation algorithms with small-constant factors for the problem on unit squares, unit disks, and unit-height axis parallel rectangles. Additionally, we prove that the Maximum Triangle-free Subgraph ([Formula: see text]) problem is NP-hard for axis-parallel rectangles. Here the objective is the same as that of the [Formula: see text] except the intersection graph induced by the set [Formula: see text] needs to be triangle-free only (instead of being bipartite).
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".