MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126261522 · doi:10.1145/1367497.1367719

Offline matching approximation algorithms in exchange markets

2008· article· en· W2126261522 on OpenAlexaff
Zeinab Abbassi, Laks V. S. Lakshmanan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsMatching (statistics)Computer scienceApproximation algorithmProbabilistic logicAlgorithmOnline and offlineOnline algorithmForeign exchange marketArtificial intelligenceForeign exchangeEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by several marketplace applications on rapidly growing online social networks, we study the problem of efficient offline matching algorithms for online exchange markets. We consider two main models of one-shot markets and exchange markets over time. For one-shot markets, we study three main variants of the problem: one-to-one exchange market problem, exchange market problem with short cycles, and probabilistic exchange market problem. We show that all the above problems are NP-hard, and propose heuristics and approximation algorithms for these problems. Experiments show that the number of items exchanged will increase when exchanges through cycles are allowed. Exploring algorithms for markets over time is an interesting direction for future work.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207