MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083593915 · doi:10.61091/um124-11

1,2-efficiency in grid graphs

2025· article· en· W7083593915 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueUtilitas Mathematica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociopolitical Dynamics in Nepal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVertex (graph theory)Dominating setNeighbourhood (mathematics)Maximal independent setGridIndependent setFeedback vertex set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Let <span class="math inline">\(G = (V, E)\)</span> be a graph with vertex set <span class="math inline">\(V\)</span> and edge set <span class="math inline">\(E\)</span>. A vertex set <span class="math inline">\(S \subset V\)</span> is a <span><em>perfect dominating set</em></span> if every vertex in <span class="math inline">\(V - S\)</span> is adjacent to exactly one vertex in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span>. A perfect dominating set <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span> is furthermore: (i) an <span><em>efficient dominating set</em></span> or a <span><em><span class="math inline">\(1\)</span>-efficient dominating set</em></span> if no two vertices in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span> are adjacent, (ii) a <span><em>total efficient dominating set</em></span> or a <span><em><span class="math inline">\(2\)</span>-efficient dominating set</em></span> if every vertex in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span> is adjacent to exactly one other vertex in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span>, and (iii) a <span><em><span class="math inline">\(1,2\)</span>-efficient dominating set</em></span> if every vertex in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span> either adjacent to no vertices in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span> or to exactly one other vertex in <span class="math inline">\(S\)</span>. In this paper we introduce the concept of <span><em><span class="math inline">\(1,2\)</span>-efficiency</em></span> in graphs and apply it to the existence of <span class="math inline">\(1,2\)</span>-efficient sets in <span><em>grid graphs</em></span> <span class="math inline">\(G_{m,n}\)</span>, that is, graphs resembling chessboards having a rectangular array of <span class="math inline">\(m \times n\)</span> vertices arranged into <span class="math inline">\(m\)</span> rows of <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> vertices, or <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> columns of <span class="math inline">\(m\)</span> vertices. It is well known that almost no grid graphs are <span class="math inline">\(1\)</span>-efficient, and relatively few grid graphs are <span class="math inline">\(2\)</span>-efficient. However, in this paper, we show that all but a relatively small percentage of grid graphs are <span class="math inline">\(1,2\)</span>-efficient.</p>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.333 · 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