MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414581273 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127-20

Assigning airport gates during a pandemic using tolerance graphs

2025· article· en· W4414581273 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dean Crnković, Andrea Švob

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHrvatska Zaklada za Znanost
KeywordsGeneralizationScheduling (production processes)GraphGraph coloringInterval (graph theory)Clique

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tolerance graphs, introduced by M. C. Golumbic and C. L. Monma in 1982, are a generalization of interval graphs. In this paper, we propose an application of coloring of tolerance graphs together with machine learning, in particular supervised learning, in solving problems of airport gate assignment during a pandemic of an airborne disease. The idea is to minimize a contact between passengers at the gates, in order to slow down a spread of the disease. This application includes calculating the chromatic number of a graph and finding a clique of a given size in the graph. As a result, we obtain the minimum number of gates needed under the given assumptions and the corresponding gate assignment. Further, we propose an application of list coloring, a generalization of a coloring, of tolerance graphs in solving these problems. Besides the theoretical approach, the corresponding algorithms are given. The algorithms developed may take into account several parameters, such as the number of passengers on a flight, the number of newly infected people per 1000 inhabitants. A similar approach can be taken for classroom assignment during a pandemic, scheduling meetings, etc.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicAdvanced Graph Theory ResearchFrench-language works237,207