MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929089696 · doi:10.4230/lipics.isaac.2024.15

On the Spanning and Routing Ratios of the Yao-Four Graph

2024· article· en· W6929089696 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuclidean distanceDistanceVertex (graph theory)Path graphSpannerGraphButterfly graphLine graphEuclidean geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Yao graph is a geometric spanner that was independently introduced by Yao [SIAM J. Comput., 1982] and Flinchbaugh and Jones [SIAM J. Algebr. Discret. Appl., 1981]. We prove that for any two vertices of the undirected version of the Yao graph with four cones, there is a path between them with length at most 13 + 5/√2 ≈ 16.54 times the Euclidean distance between the vertices, improving the previous best bound of approximately 54.62. We also present an online routing algorithm for the directed Yao graph with four cones that constructs a path between any two vertices with length at most 17 + 9/√2 ≈ 23.36 times the Euclidean distance between the vertices. This is the first routing algorithm for a directed Yao graph with fewer than six cones. The algorithm uses knowledge of the coordinates of the current vertex, the (up to) four neighbours of the current vertex, and the destination vertex to make a routing decision. It also uses one additional bit of memory. We show how to dispense with this single bit at the cost of increasing the length of the path to √{331 + 154√2} ≈ 23.43 times the Euclidean distance between the vertices.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207