MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412230275 · doi:10.4230/lipics.mfcs.2023.8

Recognizing H-Graphs - Beyond Circular-Arc Graphs

2023· article· en· W4412230275 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

VenueJagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Labeling and Dimension Problems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersGrantová Agentura České Republiky
KeywordsCombinatoricsArc (geometry)MathematicsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1992 Biró, Hujter and Tuza introduced, for every fixed connected graph H, the class of H-graphs, defined as the intersection graphs of connected subgraphs of some subdivision of H. Such classes of graphs are related to many known graph classes: for example, K₂-graphs coincide with interval graphs, K₃-graphs with circular-arc graphs, the union of T-graphs, where T ranges over all trees, coincides with chordal graphs. Recently, quite a lot of research has been devoted to understanding the tractability border for various computational problems, such as recognition or isomorphism testing, in classes of H-graphs for different graphs H.
\nIn this work we undertake this research topic, focusing on the recognition problem. Chaplick, Töpfer, Voborník, and Zeman showed an XP-algorithm testing whether a given graph is a T-graph, where the parameter is the size of the tree T. In particular, for every fixed tree T the recognition of T-graphs can be solved in polynomial time. Tucker showed a polynomial time algorithm recognizing K₃-graphs (circular-arc graphs). On the other hand, Chaplick et al. showed also that for every fixed graph H containing two distinct cycles sharing an edge, the recognition of H-graphs is NP-hard.
\nThe main two results of this work narrow the gap between the NP-hard and 𝖯 cases of H-graph recognition. First, we show that the recognition of H-graphs is NP-hard when H contains two distinct cycles. On the other hand, we show a polynomial-time algorithm recognizing L-graphs, where L is a graph containing a cycle and an edge attached to it (which we call lollipop graphs). Our work leaves open the recognition problems of M-graphs for every unicyclic graph M different from a cycle and a lollipop.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
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 score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.168 · 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