MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417122901 · doi:10.1016/j.ic.2025.105397

Approximation algorithms for non-sequential star packing problems

2025· article· en· W4417122901 on OpenAlexafffund
Mengyuan Hu, An Zhang, Yong Chen, Mingyang Gong, Guohui Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation and Computation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsApproximation algorithmStar (game theory)Approximation theoryGeneralizationMatching (statistics)Greedy algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a positive integer k ≥ 1 , a k -star ( k + -star, k − -star, respectively) is a connected graph containing a degree- ℓ vertex and ℓ degree-1 vertices, where ℓ = k ( ℓ ≥ k , 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ k , respectively). The k + -star packing problem is to cover as many vertices of an input graph G as possible using vertex-disjoint k + -stars in G ; and given k > t ≥ 1 , the k − / t -star packing problem is to cover as many vertices of G as possible using vertex-disjoint k − -stars but no t -stars in G . Both problems are NP-hard for any fixed k ≥ 2 . We present a ( 1 + k 2 2 k + 1 ) - and a 3 2 -approximation algorithms for the k + -star packing problem when k ≥ 3 and k = 2 , respectively, and a ( 1 + 1 t + 1 + 1 / k ) -approximation algorithm for the k − / t -star packing problem when k > t ≥ 2 . They are all local search algorithms and they improve the best known approximation algorithms for the problems, respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation and ComputationSame topicOptimization and Packing ProblemsFrench-language works237,207