MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101083806 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.1110.0476

A Generic Branch-and-Cut Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimization Problems: Application to the Multilabel Traveling Salesman Problem

2011· article· en· W2101083806 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersMinistère de l'Education Nationale, de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche
KeywordsTravelling salesman problemBranch and cut2-optBottleneck traveling salesman problemBranch and boundMathematical optimizationMathematicsMaximum cutAlgorithmTraveling purchaser problemConstraint (computer-aided design)Hamiltonian pathComputer scienceInteger programmingCombinatoricsGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a generic branch-and-cut algorithm applicable to the solution of multiobjective optimization problems for which a lower bound can be defined as a polynomially solvable multiobjective problem. The algorithm closely follows standard branch and cut except for the definition of the lower and upper bounds and some optional speed-up mechanisms. It is applied to a routing problem called the multilabel traveling salesman problem, a variant of the traveling salesman problem in which labels are attributed to the edges. The goal is to find a Hamiltonian cycle that minimizes the tour length and the number of labels in the tour. Implementations of the generic multiobjective branch-and-cut algorithm and speed-up mechanisms are described. Computational experiments are conducted, and the method is compared to the classical ϵ-constraint method.

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)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.237 · 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