Efficient Exact Resistance Distance Computation on Small-Treewidth Graphs: a Labelling Approach

Resistance distance computation is a fundamental problem in graph analysis, yet existing random walk-based methods are limited to approximate solutions and suffer from poor efficiency on small-treewidth graphs (e.g., road networks). In contrast, shortest-path distance computation achieves remarkable efficiency on such graphs by leveraging cut properties and tree decompositions. Motivated by this disparity, we first analyze the cut property of resistance distance. While a direct generalization proves impractical due to costly matrix operations, we overcome this limitation by integrating tree decompositions, revealing that the resistance distance $r(s,t)$ depends only on labels along the paths from $s$ and $t$ to the root of the decomposition. This insight enables compact labelling structures. Based on this, we propose \treeindex, a novel index method that constructs a resistance distance labelling of size $O(n \cdot h_{\mathcal{G}})$ in $O(n \cdot h_{\mathcal{G}}^2 \cdot d_{\max})$ time, where $h_{\mathcal{G}}$ (tree height) and $d_{\max}$ (maximum degree) behave as small constants in many real-world small-treewidth graphs (e.g., road networks). Our labelling supports exact single-pair queries in $O(h_{\mathcal{G}})$ time and single-source queries in $O(n \cdot h_{\mathcal{G}})$ time. Extensive experiments show that TreeIndex substantially outperforms state-of-the-art approaches. For instance, on the full USA road network, it constructs a $405$ GB labelling in $7$ hours (single-threaded) and answers exact single-pair queries in $10^{-3}$ seconds and single-source queries in $190$ seconds--the first exact method scalable to such large graphs.

Could ChatGPT get an Engineering Degree? Evaluating Higher Education Vulnerability to AI Assistants

AI assistants are being increasingly used by students enrolled in higher education institutions. While these tools provide opportunities for improved teaching and education, they also pose significant challenges for assessment and learning outcomes. We conceptualize these challenges through the lens of vulnerability, the potential for university assessments and learning outcomes to be impacted by student use of generative AI. We investigate the potential scale of this vulnerability by measuring the degree to which AI assistants can complete assessment questions in standard university-level STEM courses. Specifically, we compile a novel dataset of textual assessment questions from 50 courses at EPFL and evaluate whether two AI assistants, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can adequately answer these questions. We use eight prompting strategies to produce responses and find that GPT-4 answers an average of 65.8% of questions correctly, and can even produce the correct answer across at least one prompting strategy for 85.1% of questions. When grouping courses in our dataset by degree program, these systems already pass non-project assessments of large numbers of core courses in various degree programs, posing risks to higher education accreditation that will be amplified as these models improve. Our results call for revising program-level assessment design in higher education in light of advances in generative AI.