MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110504071 · doi:10.1613/jair.1815

Dynamic Local Search for the Maximum Clique Problem

2006· article· en· W2110504071 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne Pullan, Holger H. Hoos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClique problemVertex (graph theory)Benchmark (surveying)CliqueMathematicsGeneralizationMathematical optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithmCombinatoricsGraphChordal graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce DLS-MC, a new stochastic local search algorithm for the maximum clique problem. DLS-MC alternates between phases of iterative improvement, during which suitable vertices are added to the current clique, and plateau search, during which vertices of the current clique are swapped with vertices not contained in the current clique. The selection of vertices is solely based on vertex penalties that are dynamically adjusted during the search, and a perturbation mechanism is used to overcome search stagnation. The behaviour of DLS-MC is controlled by a single parameter, penalty delay, which controls the frequency at which vertex penalties are reduced. We show empirically that DLS-MC achieves substantial performance improvements over state-of-the-art algorithms for the maximum clique problem over a large range of the commonly used DIMACS benchmark instances.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations158
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence ResearchSame topicComplexity and Algorithms in GraphsFrench-language works237,207