Face-hitting dominating sets in planar graphs: Alternative proof and linear-time algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a recent paper, Francis, Illickan, Jose and Rajendraprasad showed that every $n$-vertex plane graph $G$ has (under some natural restrictions) a vertex-partition into two sets $V_1$ and $V_2$ such that each $V_i$ is \emph{dominating} (every vertex of $G$ contains a vertex of $V_i$ in its closed neighbourhood) and \emph{face-hitting} (every face of $G$ is incident to a vertex of $V_i$). Their proof works by considering a supergraph $G'$ of $G$ that has certain properties, and among all such graphs, taking one that has the fewest edges. As such, their proof is not algorithmic. Their proof also relies on the 4-color theorem, for which a quadratic-time algorithm exists, but it would not be easy to implement. In this paper, we give a new proof that every $n$-vertex plane graph $G$ has (under the same restrictions) a vertex-partition into two dominating face-hitting sets. Our proof is constructive, and requires nothing more complicated than splitting a graph into 2-connected components, finding an ear decomposition, and computing a perfect matching in a 3-regular plane graph. For all these problems, linear-time algorithms are known and so we can find the vertex-partition in linear time. Preliminary version appeared at SOFSEM 2026
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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".