MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A defensive maximal covering problem on a network

2008· article· en· W1976850671 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTabu searchMathematical optimizationSimulated annealingComputer scienceRangingPerspective (graphical)Operations researchMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Consider a situation where p facilities need to be located by a leader, on the nodes of a network, to provide maximum coverage of demand generated at nodes of the network. At some point in the future it is expected that one of the links of the network will become unusable either due to a terrorist attack or a natural disaster (by the follower). The follower's objective is which link to remove. The leader's objective is to cover the most demand following such a damage to a link. The problem is formulated and analyzed from the leader's perspective. An efficient approach to solving the follower's problem is constructed. The leader's problem is solved heuristically by an ascent algorithm, simulated annealing, and tabu search, using the efficient algorithm for the solution of the follower's problem. Computational experiments on 40 test problems ranging between 100 and 900 nodes and 5–200 facilities provided good results.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.220 · 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