MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392238446 · doi:10.1137/18m1234849

Four-Coloring \(\boldsymbol{P_6}\)-Free Graphs. II. Finding an Excellent Precoloring

2024· article· en· W4392238446 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersArmy Research OfficeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsGraph coloringComplete coloringDiscrete mathematicsGraphLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the second paper in a series of two. The goal of the series is to give a polynomial-time algorithm for the 4-coloring problem and the 4-precoloring extension problem restricted to the class of graphs with no induced six-vertex path, thus proving a conjecture of Huang. Combined with previously known results, this completes the classification of the complexity of the 4-coloring problem for graphs with a connected forbidden induced subgraph. In this paper we give a polynomial time-algorithm that starts with a 4-precoloring of a graph with no induced six-vertex path and outputs a polynomial-sized collection of so-called excellent precolorings. Excellent precolorings are easier to handle than general ones, and, in addition, in order to determine whether the initial precoloring can be extended to the whole graph, it is enough to answer the same question for each of the excellent precolorings in the collection. The first paper in the series deals with excellent precolorings, thus providing a complete solution to the problem.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.271 · 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