MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065073968 · doi:10.5539/mas.v7n6p90

On Solving Linear Fractional Programming Problems

2013· article· en· W2065073968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Mathematical Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVIT University
KeywordsFractional programmingLinear programmingSimplex algorithmDecomposition method (queueing theory)Linear-fractional programmingMathematical optimizationDecompositionMathematicsComputer scienceFuzzy logicAlgorithmNonlinear programmingNonlinear systemDiscrete mathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method namely, denominator objective restriction method based on simplex method is proposed for solving linear fractional programming problems. Further, another method namely, decomposition-restriction method based on decomposition principle and the denominator objective restriction method is proposed for obtaining an optimal fuzzy solution to the fully fuzzy linear fractional programming problem. The procedures for the proposed methods are illustrated with the numerical examples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicOptimization and Mathematical ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207