Symmetry Handling in Mixed‐Integer Programming
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article focuses on solving integer programs whose feasible regions are highly symmetric. Symmetry has long been considered a curse in integer programming, and auxiliary (often extended) formulations are sought to reduce the amount of symmetry in an integer linear programming (ILP) formulation. The approach taken in this article describes methods that seek to exploit the symmetry, not avoid it by reformulation. A standard method for solving integer programs is branch‐and‐bound . In branch‐and‐bound, the set of feasible solutions is partitioned, forming more easily solved subproblems. The presence of symmetry means that many of these subproblems are equivalent in a sense we describe later. Only one member of each collection of equivalent subproblems needs to be solved. Failure to recognize that many subproblems are equivalent results in a waste of computational effort that can render an instance unsolvable by branch‐and‐bound. In this article, we describe methods that use the symmetry of the problem formulation to reduce the size of the feasible region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it