Discrepancy-Based Additive Bounding Procedures
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We model portions of the search tree via so-called search constraints. We focus on a particular kind of search constraint, the k-discrepancy constraint appearing in discrepancy-based search. The property that a node has an associated discrepancy k can be modeled (and enforced) through a linear constraint. Our key result is the exploitation of the k-discrepancy constraint to improve the bound given by any relaxation of a combinatorial optimization problem through the additive bounding technique (Fischetti and Toth 1989). We show how this simple idea can be effectively exploited to tighten relaxations in CP solvers and speed up the proof of optimality by performing a large variety of computational experiments on test problems involving the AllDifferent constraint. In this view, the additive bounding technique represents a non-trivial link between search and bound. Moreover, such a technique is general because it does not depend on either the AllDifferent constraint or the discrepancy search technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it