MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095153636 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2013.0568

The Robust (Minmax Regret) Quadratic Assignment Problem with Interval Flows

2013· article· en· W2095153636 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

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Manufacturing and Logistics Optimization
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRegretMathematical optimizationHeuristicsBenders' decompositionMathematicsGeneralizationTabu searchQuadratic programmingContext (archaeology)MinimaxHeuristicQuadratic equationInterval (graph theory)Computer scienceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a generalization of the classical quadratic assignment problem, where material flows between facilities are uncertain, and only upper and lower bounds are known for each flow. The objective is to find a minmax regret solution. We present an exact Benders decomposition algorithm based on two developed mathematical programming formulations and on the developed linearizations of master problems, and a heuristic based on using tabu search in the context of a Benders decomposition framework. Then, we develop a hybrid Benders decomposition approach that allows us to combine the speed of heuristics with the rigor and precision of the exact Benders method. We discuss the results of extensive computational experiments.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · 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