MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971969277 · doi:10.1137/120869390

On the Average Condition of Random Linear Programs

2013· article· en· W1971969277 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

VenueSIAM Journal on Optimization · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Approximation and Integration
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsLogarithmUpper and lower boundsCombinatoricsBasis (linear algebra)Condition numberLinear programmingDual (grammatical number)Discrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give an ${\cal O}(\log n)$ bound for the expectation of the logarithm of the condition number ${\cal K}(A,b,c)$ introduced in “Solving Linear Programs with Finite Precision: I. Condition Numbers and Random Programs” [Math. Program., 99 (2004), pp. 175--196]. This bound improves the previously existing bound, which was of ${\cal O}(n)$, and yields average-case bounds for both the required precision and the complexity of computing an optimal basis (or a pair of primal-dual optimizers).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.256 · 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