HEURISTIC SEARCH IN CONSTRAINED BIPARTITE MATCHING WITH APPLICATIONS TO PROTEIN NMR BACKBONE RESONANCE ASSIGNMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The constrained bipartite matching (CBM) problem is a variant of the classical bipartite matching problem that has been well studied in the Combinatorial Optimization community. The input to CBM is an edge-weighted complete bipartite graph in which there are a same number of vertices on both sides and vertices on one side are sequentially ordered while vertices on the other side are partitioned and connected into disjoint directed paths. In a feasible matching, a path must be mapped to consecutive vertices on the other side. The optimization goal is to find a maximum or a minimum weight perfect matching. Such an optimization problem has its applications to scheduling and protein Nuclear Magnetic Resonance peak assignment. It has been shown to be NP-hard and MAX SNP-hard if the perfectness requirement is dropped. In this paper, more results on the inapproximability are presented and IDA*, a memory efficient variant of the well known A* search algorithm, is utilized to solve the problem. Accordingly, search heuristics and a set of heuristic evaluation functions are developed to assist the search, whose effectiveness is demonstrated by a simulation study using real protein NMR backbone resonance assignment instances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".