Efficient Learning of Balanced Signed Graphs via Iterative Linear Programming
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Signed graphs are equipped with both positive and negative edge weights, encoding pairwise correlations as well as anti-correlations in data. A balanced signed graph has no cycles of odd number of negative edges. Laplacian of a balanced signed graph has eigenvectors that map simply to ones in a similarity-transformed positive graph Laplacian, thus enabling reuse of well-studied spectral filters designed for positive graphs. We propose a fast method to learn a balanced signed graph Laplacian directly from data. Specifically, for each node i, to determine its polarity β<inf xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">i</inf> ∈{−1,1} and edge weights $\left\{ {{w_{i,j}}} \right\}_{j = 1}^N$, we extend a sparse inverse covariance formulation based on linear programming (LP) called CLIME, by adding linear constraints to enforce "consistent" signs of edge weights $\left\{ {{w_{i,j}}} \right\}_{j = 1}^N$ with the polarities of connected nodes—i.e., positive/negative edges connect nodes of same/opposing polarities. For each LP, we adopt projections on convex set (POCS) to determine a suitable CLIME parameter ρ > 0 that guarantees LP feasibility. We solve the resulting LP via an off-the-shelf LP solver. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets show that our balanced graph learning method outperforms competing methods and enables the use of spectral filters and graph neural networks designed for positive graphs on balanced signed graphs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it