The Geodesic Edge Center of a Simple Polygon
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
Abstract The geodesic edge center of a simple polygon is a point c inside the polygon that minimizes the maximum geodesic distance from c to any edge of the polygon, where geodesic distance is the shortest path distance inside the polygon. We give a linear-time algorithm to find a geodesic edge center of a simple polygon. This improves on the previous $$O(n \log n)$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>log</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> time algorithm by Lubiw and Naredla [European Symposium on Algorithms, 2021]. The algorithm builds on an algorithm to find the geodesic vertex center of a simple polygon due to Pollack, Sharir, and Rote [Discrete & Computational Geometry, 1989] and an improvement to linear time by Ahn, Barba, Bose, De Carufel, Korman, and Oh [Discrete & Computational Geometry, 2016]. The geodesic edge center can easily be found from the geodesic farthest-edge Voronoi diagram of the polygon. Finding that Voronoi diagram in linear time is an open question, although the geodesic nearest edge Voronoi diagram (the medial axis) can be found in linear time. As a first step of our geodesic edge center algorithm, we give a linear-time algorithm to find the geodesic farthest-edge Voronoi diagram restricted to the polygon boundary.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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