MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070821011

Postman Problems on Mixed Graphs

2006· dissertation· en· W7070821011 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsMixed graphConjectureUndirected graphGraphTraverseEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionLinear programmingEulerian path
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The <i>mixed postman problem</i> consists of finding a minimum cost tour of a mixed graph <i>M</i> = (<i>V</i>,<i>E</i>,<i>A</i>) traversing all its edges and arcs at least once. We prove that two well-known linear programming relaxations of this problem are equivalent. The <i>extra cost</i> of a mixed postman tour <i>T</i> is the cost of <i>T</i> minus the cost of the edges and arcs of <i>M</i>. We prove that it is <i>NP</i>-hard to approximate the minimum extra cost of a mixed postman tour. \nA related problem, known as the <i>windy postman problem</i>, consists of finding a minimum cost tour of an undirected graph <i>G</i>=(<i>V</i>,<i>E</i>) traversing all its edges at least once, where the cost of an edge depends on the direction of traversal. We say that <i>G</i> is <i>windy postman perfect</i> if a certain <i>windy postman polyhedron O</i> (<i>G</i>) is integral. We prove that series-parallel undirected graphs are windy postman perfect, therefore solving a conjecture of Win. \nGiven a mixed graph <i>M</i> = (<i>V</i>,<i>E</i>,<i>A</i>) and a subset <i>R</i> ⊆ <i>E</i> ∪ <i>A</i>, we say that a mixed postman tour of <i>M</i> is <i>restricted</i> if it traverses the elements of <i>R</i> exactly once. The <i>restricted mixed postman problem</i> consists of finding a minimum cost restricted tour. We prove that this problem is <i>NP</i>-hard even if <i>R</i>=<i>A</i> and we restrict <i>M</i> to be planar, hence solving a conjecture of Veerasamy. We also prove that it is <i>NP</i>-complete to decide whether there exists a restricted tour even if <i>R</i>=<i>E</i> and we restrict <i>M</i> to be planar. \nThe <i>edges postman problem</i> is the special case of the restricted mixed postman problem when <i>R</i>=<i>A</i>. We give a new class of valid inequalities for this problem. We introduce a relaxation of this problem, called the <i>b-join problem</i>, that can be solved in polynomial time. We give an algorithm which is simultaneously a 4/3-approximation algorithm for the edges postman problem, and a 2-approximation algorithm for the extra cost of a tour. \nThe <i>arcs postman problem</i> is the special case of the restricted mixed postman problem when <i>R</i>=<i>E</i>. We introduce a class of necessary conditions for <i>M</i> to have an arcs postman tour, and we give a polynomial-time algorithm to decide whether one of these conditions holds. We give linear programming formulations of this problem for mixed graphs arising from windy postman perfect graphs, and mixed graphs whose arcs form a forest.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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