MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412202024 · doi:10.1145/3747591

Minimum Plane Bichromatic Spanning Trees

2025· article· en· W4412202024 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

VenueACM Transactions on Algorithms · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpanning treeCombinatoricsPlane (geometry)MathematicsMinimum degree spanning treeComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a set of red and blue points in the plane, a Minimum Bichromatic Spanning Tree (MinBST) is a shortest spanning tree of the points such that every edge has a red and a blue endpoint. A MinBST can be computed in \(O(n\log n)\) time where \( n \) is the number of points. In contrast to the standard Euclidean MST, which is always plane (noncrossing), a MinBST may have edges that cross each other. However, we prove that a MinBST is quasi-plane, that is, it does not contain three pairwise crossing edges, and we determine the maximum number of crossings. Moreover, we study the problem of finding a Minimum Plane Bichromatic Spanning Tree (MinPBST) which is a shortest bichromatic spanning tree with pairwise noncrossing edges. This problem is known to be NP-hard. The previous best approximation algorithm, due to Borgelt et al., has a ratio of \(O(\sqrt{n})\) . It is also known that the optimum solution can be computed in polynomial time in some special cases, for instance, when the points are in convex position, collinear, semi-collinear, or when one color class has constant size. We present an \(O(\log n)\) -factor approximation algorithm for the general case.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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