aiqbench analysis
This paper advances theoretical learning theory by establishing tight bounds on the non-clashing teaching dimension for concept classes defined in planar graphs, directly addressing a fundamental open question regarding its relationship to VC dimension. The work also reveals inherent computational hardness in distinguishing specific teaching complexity values within this geometric setting.
On Collusion-Free Teaching in Planar Graphs
arXiv:2610.18714v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Non-clashing teaching minimizes teaching complexity among models satisfying the Goldman--Mathias collusion-avoidance criterion. While the Vapnik--Chervonenkis dimension (VCdim) measures the complexity of learning from samples, non-clashing teaching dimension (NCTD) measures the number of examples required when a teacher can select them. Whether NCTD is always bounded above by VCdim remains a fundamental open question in learning theory. In this paper, we investigate this question for the concept classes of closed neighborhoods in planar graphs. We prove a tight upper bound of two on their NCTD, thereby establishing the conjectured inequality for this family. For the positive variant NCTD+, in which teaching sets contain only positive examples, we obtain a tight upper bound of four. Finally, we show that deciding whether either NCTD+ or NCTD is at most one is NP-complete, even for concept classes of closed neighborhoods in planar graphs. In particular, despite the upper bound of two on NCTD for such classes, distinguishing between NCTD values of one and two remains NP-hard.
Abstract:Non-clashing teaching minimizes teaching complexity among models satisfying the Goldman--Mathias collusion-avoidance criterion. While the Vapnik--Chervonenkis dimension (VCdim) measures the complexity of learning from samples, non-clashing teaching dimension (NCTD) measures the number of examples required when a teacher can select them. Whether NCTD is always bounded above by VCdim remains a fundamental open question in learning theory. In this paper, we investigate this question for the concept classes of closed neighborhoods in planar graphs. We prove a tight upper bound of two on their NCTD, thereby establishing the conjectured inequality for this family. For the positive variant NCTD+, in which teaching sets contain only positive examples, we obtain a tight upper bound of four. Finally, we show that deciding whether either NCTD+ or NCTD is at most one is NP-complete, even for concept classes of closed neighborhoods in planar graphs. In particular, despite the upper bound of two on NCTD for such classes, distinguishing between NCTD values of one and two remains NP-hard.
Discrete Mathematics (cs.DM); Computational Complexity (cs.CC); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.18714 [cs.DM]
(or arXiv:2610.18714v1 [cs.DM] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.18714 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 262 words
Related coverage

Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · Sep 27, 2026
Constrained Goal-directed Planar Graph Generation with Grammar-based Reinforcement Learning
arXiv · Oct 6, 2026
PlanarBench: Evaluating LLM Spatial Reasoning via Planar Graph Drawing
arXiv · Sep 2, 2026

The payload: the semantic layer, memory, and the loop that fills it
Neo4j · Aug 10, 2026