MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414100071 · doi:10.26493/1855-3974.3451.46f

Extending graph burning to hypergraphs

2025· article· en· W4414100071 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueArs Mathematica Contemporanea · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHypergraphGraphConjectureGeneralizationExistential quantificationUpper and lower bounds

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graph burning is a round-based game or process that discretely models the spread of influence throughout a network. We introduce a generalization of graph burning which applies to hypergraphs, as well as a variant called ``lazy'' hypergraph burning. Interestingly, lazily burning a graph is trivial, while lazily burning a hypergraph can be quite complicated. Moreover, the lazy burning model is a useful tool for analyzing the round-based model. One of our key results is that arbitrary hypergraphs do not satisfy a bound analogous to the one in the Burning Number Conjecture for graphs. We also obtain bounds on the burning number and lazy burning number of a hypergraph in terms of its parameters, and present several open problems in the field of (lazy) hypergraph burning.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · 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