Continuous learning automata solutions to the capacity assignment problem
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
The Capacity Assignment (CA) problem focuses on finding the best possible set of capacities for the links that satisfies the traffic requirements in a prioritized network while minimizing the cost. Most approaches consider a single class of packets flowing through the network, but, in reality, different classes of packets with different packet lengths and priorities are transmitted over the networks. In this paper, we assume that the traffic consists of different classes of packets with different average packet lengths and priorities. We shall look at three different solutions to this problem. K. Marayuma and D.T. Tang (1977) proposed a single algorithm composed of several elementary heuristic procedures. A. Levi and C. Ersoy (1994) introduced a simulated annealing approach that produced substantially better results. In this paper, we introduce a new method which uses continuous learning automata to solve the problem. Our new schemes produce superior results when compared with either of the previous solutions and is, to our knowledge, currently the best known solution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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