MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060798327 · doi:10.1002/net.20408

Big segment small segment global optimization algorithm on networks

2010· article· en· W2060798327 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

VenueNetworks · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFacility Location and Emergency Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFacility location problem1-center problemComputer scienceCover (algebra)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmFunction (biology)Optimization problemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article, we propose a global optimization technique (Big Segment Small Segment) for solving single facility location problems on a network when the location of the facility can either at nodes or along the links of the network. Some multiple facility location problems can be solved by recursively solving single facility problems. The technique is tested on five problems: the mixed weights 1‐median problem where the weights are a mix of positive and negative values, the obnoxious facility location problem assuming that the nuisance function declines by the square of the distance, the competitive facility location problem using the gravity model, and minimizing cover by locating two facilities while requiring a minimum distance between them. Computational experiments provided excellent results. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. NETWORKS, Vol. 58(1), 1–11 2011

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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