MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149463069 · doi:10.1109/simsym.1994.283113

The resolution of an open-loop resource allocation problem using a neural network approach

2002· article· en· W2149463069 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Defense Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAsynchronous communicationResource allocationArtificial neural networkScheduling (production processes)Constraint satisfactionContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationGreedy algorithmStrengths and weaknessesResource management (computing)Distributed computingAlgorithmMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A neural network-based optimization algorithm to solve an open-loop resource allocation problem is presented. The approach used is well suited to represent the structure of the model in which the occurrence of asynchronous outcome and decision events are explicitly incorporated. Mainly inspired from the principles of Hopfield neural networks, the algorithm computes a near-optimal solution to the illuminator scheduling problem while maintaining constraint satisfaction to support weapon-target allocation. A computational experiment conducted within the context of naval anti-air warfare shows the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed method over an alternate greedy technique.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMilitary Defense Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207