MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888493691 · doi:10.20382/jocg.v16i1a4

Geometric hitting set for line-constrained disks and related problems

2023· article· en· W6888493691 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Geometry (Carleton University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Point (geometry)Plane (geometry)Quadratic equationRunning timeHitting timeComputational geometrySquare (algebra)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a set $P$ of $n$ weighted points and a set $S$ of $m$ disks in the plane, the hitting set problem is to compute a subset $P'$ of points of $P$ such that each disk contains at least one point of $P'$ and the total weight of all points of $P'$ is minimized. The problem is known to be NP-hard. In this paper, we consider a line-constrained version of the problem in which all disks are centered on a line $\ell$. We present an $O((m+n)\log(m+n)+\kappa \log m)$ time algorithm for the problem, where $\kappa$ is the number of pairs of disks that intersect. For the unit-disk case where all disks have the same radius, the running time can be reduced to $O((n + m)\log(m + n))$. In addition, we solve the problem in $O((m + n)\log(m + n))$ time in the $L_{\infty}$ and $L_1$ metrics, in which a disk is a square and a diamond (assuming that $\ell$ is horizontal), respectively. Our techniques can also be used to solve other geometric hitting set problems. For example, given in the plane a set $P$ of $n$ weighted points and a set $S$ of $n$ half-planes, we solve in $O(n^4\log n)$ time the problem of finding a minimum weight hitting set of $P$ for $S$. This improves the previous best algorithm of $O(n^6)$ time by nearly a quadratic factor.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Geometry (Carleton University)Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207