A Weakly-Robust PTAS for Minimum Clique Partition in Unit Disk Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of partitioning the set of vertices of a given unit disk graph (UDG) into a minimum number of cliques. The problem is NP-hard and various constant factor approximations are known, with the current best ratio of 3. Our main result is a {\em weakly robust} polynomial time approximation scheme (PTAS) for UDGs expressed with edge-lengths, it either (i) computes a clique partition or (ii) gives a certificate that the graph is not a UDG; for the case (i) that it computes a clique partition, we show that it is guaranteed to be within $(1+\eps)$ ratio of the optimum if the input is UDG; however if the input is not a UDG it either computes a clique partition as in case (i) with no guarantee on the quality of the clique partition or detects that it is not a UDG. Noting that recognition of UDG's is NP-hard even if we are given edge lengths, our PTAS is a weakly-robust algorithm. Our algorithm can be transformed into an $O(\frac{\log^* n}{\eps^{O(1)}})$ time distributed PTAS. We consider a weighted version of the clique partition problem on vertex weighted UDGs that generalizes the problem. We note some key distinctions with the unweighted version, where ideas useful in obtaining a PTAS breakdown. Yet, surprisingly, it admits a $(2+\eps)$-approximation algorithm for the weighted case where the graph is expressed, say, as an adjacency matrix. This improves on the best known 8-approximation for the {\em unweighted} case for UDGs expressed in standard form.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".