MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407278403 · doi:10.1007/s40687-024-00492-5

Complexity of chess domination problems

2025· article· en· W4407278403 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexis Langlois-Rémillard, Mia Müßig, Érika Roldán

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in the Mathematical Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesMax-Planck-Institut für Mathematik in den NaturwissenschaftenBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneEuropean CommissionHORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie ActionsFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekNational Centres of Competence in Research SwissMAP
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsMathematical economicsAlgebra over a fieldPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study different domination problems of attacking and non-attacking rooks and queens on polyominoes and polycubes of all dimensions. Our main result proves that maximum independent domination is NP-complete for non-attacking queens and for non-attacking rooks on polycubes of dimension three and higher. We also analyze these problems for polyominoes and convex polyominoes, conjecture the complexity classes, and provide a computer tool for investigation. We have also computed new values for classical queen domination problems on chessboards (square polyominoes). For our computations, we have translated the problem into an integer linear programming instance. Finally, using this computational implementation and the game engine Godot, we have developed a video game of minimum domination of queens and rooks on randomly generated polyominoes.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.433
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.065 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in the Mathematical SciencesSame topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207