MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055668215 · doi:10.1002/nav.20030

The gradual covering problem

2004· article· en· W2055668215 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

VenueNaval Research Logistics (NRL) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConstant (computer programming)Extreme pointPoint (geometry)Mathematical optimizationMinimum distanceFunction (biology)Signed distance functionZero (linguistics)MathematicsComputer scienceLinear programmingAlgorithmCombinatoricsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we investigate the gradual covering problem. Within a certain distance from the facility the demand point is fully covered, and beyond another specified distance the demand point is not covered. Between these two given distances the coverage is linear in the distance from the facility. This formulation can be converted to the Weber problem by imposing a special structure on its cost function. The cost is zero (negligible) up to a certain minimum distance, and it is a constant beyond a certain maximum distance. Between these two extreme distances the cost is linear in the distance. The problem is analyzed and a branch and bound procedure is proposed for its solution. Computational results are presented. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Naval Research Logistics, 2004

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.200 · 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