Cited by 61Satellite Communication SystemsComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsScheduling and Optimization Algorithms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the tractability of satellite range scheduling

Vazquez, Antonio J., Erwin, R. Scott·2015·Optimization Letters

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11590-014-0744-8

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Vazquez, A. J., & Erwin, R. S.
Affiliations
Kirtland Air Force Base (US)
Venue
Optimization Letters
Published
2014-04-10
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
311-327
ISSN
  • 1862-4472 (ISSN-L)
  • 1862-4480
OpenAlex
W2141163456
Cited by
61
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Optimization Letters (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Satellite Communication Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Complexity and Algorithms in Graphs
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Scheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Keywords
complexity analysis, polynomial-time solvability, computational tractability, NP-hardness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review