MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413073558 · doi:10.37236/13247

Clustered Colouring of Graph Products

2025· article· en· W4413073558 on OpenAlexaff
Rutger Campbell, J. Pascal Gollin, Kevin Hendrey, Thomas Lesgourgues, Bojan Mohar, Youri Tamitegama, Jane Tan, David R. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Electronic Journal of Combinatorics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsMathematicsTreewidthBounded functionDiscrete mathematicsCluster analysis1-planar graphPathwidthDegree (music)Partial k-treeGraphChordal graphLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A colouring of a graph $G$ has clustering $k$ if the maximum number of vertices in a monochromatic component equals $k$. Motivated by recent results showing that many natural graph classes are subgraphs of the strong product of a graph with bounded treewidth and a path, this paper studies clustered colouring of strong products of two bounded treewidth graphs, where none, one, or both graphs have bounded degree. For example, in the case of two colours, if $n$ is the number of vertices in the product, then we show that clustering $\Theta(n^{2/3})$ is best possible, even if one of the graphs is a path. However, if both graphs have bounded degree, then clustering $\Theta(n^{1/2})$ is best possible. With three colours, if one of the graphs has bounded degree, then we show that clustering $\Theta(n^{3/7})$ is best possible. However, if neither graph has bounded degree, then clustering $\Omega(n^{1/2})$ is necessary. More general bounds for any given number of colours are also presented.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueThe Electronic Journal of CombinatoricsSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207