MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416052615 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.11256

Covering Approximate Shortest Paths with DAGs

2025· preprint· en· W4416052615 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimons Institute for the Theory of Computing, University of California BerkeleyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDirected acyclic graphUpper and lower boundsDirected graphProbabilistic logicEmbeddingTree (set theory)Cover (algebra)Simple (philosophy)K-ary tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We define and study analogs of probabilistic tree embedding and tree cover for directed graphs. We define the notion of a DAG cover of a general directed graph $G$: a small collection $D_1,\dots D_g$ of DAGs so that for all pairs of vertices $s,t$, some DAG $D_i$ provides low distortion for $dist(s,t)$; i.e. $ dist_G(s, t) \le \min_{i \in [g]} dist_{D_i}(s, t) \leq α\cdot dist_G(s, t)$, where $α$ is the distortion. As a trivial upper bound, there is a DAG cover with $n$ DAGs and $α=1$ by taking the shortest-paths tree from each vertex. When each DAG is restricted to be a subgraph of $G$, there is a matching lower bound (via a directed cycle) that $n$ DAGs are necessary, even to preserve reachability. Thus, we allow the DAGs to include a limited number of additional edges not in the original graph. When $n^2$ additional edges are allowed, there is a simple upper bound of two DAGs and $α=1$. Our first result is an almost-matching lower bound that even for $n^{2-o(1)}$ additional edges, at least $n^{1-o(1)}$ DAGs are needed, even to preserve reachability. However, the story is different when the number of additional edges is $\tilde{O}(m)$, a natural setting where the sparsity of the DAG collection nearly matches the original graph. Our main upper bound is that there is a near-linear time algorithm to construct a DAG cover with $\tilde{O}(m)$ additional edges, polylogarithmic distortion, and only $O(\log n)$ DAGs. This is similar to known results for undirected graphs: the well-known FRT probabilistic tree embedding implies a tree cover where both the number of trees and the distortion are logarithmic. Our algorithm also extends to a certain probabilistic embedding guarantee. Lastly, we complement our upper bound with a lower bound showing that achieving a DAG cover with no distortion and $\tilde{O}(m)$ additional edges requires a polynomial number of DAGs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · 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