MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967030015 · doi:10.1145/1159892.1159899

An approximation algorithm for scheduling malleable tasks under general precedence constraints

2006· article· en· W1967030015 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Algorithms · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob shop schedulingScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceApproximation algorithmTask (project management)ScheduleMathematical optimizationAsymptotically optimal algorithmAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we study the problem of scheduling malleable tasks with precedence constraints. We are given m identical processors and n tasks. For each task the processing time is a function of the number of processors allotted to it. In addition, the tasks must be processed according to the precedence constraints. The goal is to minimize the makespan (maximum completion time) of the resulting schedule. The best previous approximation algorithm (that works in two phases) in Lepère et al. [2002b] has a ratio 3 + √5≈ 5.236. We develop an improved approximation algorithm with a ratio at most 100/43 + 100(√4349 − 7)/2451 ≈ 4.730598. We also show that our resulting ratio is asymptotically tight.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.238 · 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