MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570488346 · doi:10.1002/9781118884003.ch1

Optimization problem tasks and how they arise

2014· other· en· W1570488346 on OpenAlexaff
John Nash

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSlime Mold and Myxomycetes Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)CategorizationOptimization problemComputer scienceFunction (biology)CobBMathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the classes of problems for solution tools are discussed. It also considers the interrelationships between different problem classes as well as among the solution methods. In the real world, the objective function f() and the constraints c are not only functions of x but also depend on data; in fact, they may depend on vast arrays of data, particularly in statistical problems involving large systems. To illustrate, the chapter presents Cobb–Douglas and Hobbs' weed infestation examples, which illustrate some of the issues that will be encountered. There are some particular forms of the objective function that lead to specialized, but quite common, solution methods. This gives us one dimension or axis by which to categorize the optimization methods. Another categorization of optimization problems and their solution methods is via the constraints that are imposed on the parameters.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSlime Mold and Myxomycetes ResearchFrench-language works237,207