MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972729079 · doi:10.1137/s1052623401386794

A Primal-Dual Algorithm for Solving Polyhedral Conic Systems with a Finite-Precision Machine

2002· article· en· W1972729079 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 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsConic sectionDual (grammatical number)AlgorithmMathematical optimizationGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a primal-dual interior-point algorithm that determines which one of two alternative systems, Ax = 0, x ≥ 0, and A<sup>T</sup>y ≤ 0, is strictly feasible, provided that this pair of systems is well-posed. Furthermore, when the second system is strictly feasible, the algorithm returns a strict solution y; when the first system is strictly feasible, the algorithm returns a strict forward-approximate solution x. Here A ∈ ℝ<sup>m × n</sup> is given. Our algorithm works with finite-precision arithmetic. The amount of precision required is adjusted as the algorithm progresses and remains bounded by a measure of well-posedness C(A) of the pair of systems of constraints. The algorithm halts in at most O((m+n)<sup>1/2</sup>(log(m+n)+log(C(A))+|logγ|)) interior-point iterations, where γ ∈ (0, 1) is a parameter specifying the desired degree of accuracy of the forward-approximate solution for the first system. If the feasible system is the second one, the term |log γ| in the bound on the number of iterations can be dropped.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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