MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964676846 · doi:10.4236/ajor.2011.14024

Solving Bilevel Linear Multiobjective Programming Problems

2011· article· en· W1964676846 on OpenAlexaff
Calice Olivier Pieume, Patrice Marcotte, Laure Pauline Fotso, Patrick Siarry

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Operations Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Mathematical Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBilevel optimizationMathematical optimizationLinear programmingDecision makerPareto principleSet (abstract data type)Pareto optimalComputer scienceLinear-fractional programmingMultiobjective programmingMathematicsResolution (logic)Multi-objective optimizationOptimization problemOperations researchArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study addresses bilevel linear multi-objective problem issues i.e the special case of bilevel linear programming problems where each decision maker has several objective functions conflicting with each other. We introduce an artificial multi-objective linear programming problem of which resolution can permit to generate the whole feasible set of the upper level decisions. Based on this result and depending if the leader can evaluate or not his preferences for his different objective functions, two approaches for obtaining Pareto- optimal solutions are presented.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Operations ResearchSame topicOptimization and Mathematical ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207