Geometric hitting set for line-constrained disks and related problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".