Multicommodity demand flow in a tree and packing integer programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider requests for capacity in a given tree network T = ( V , E ) where each edge e of the tree has some integer capacity u e . Each request f is a node pair with an integer demand d f and a profit w f which is obtained if the request is satisfied. The objective is to find a set of demands that can be feasibly routed in the tree and which provides a maximum profit. This generalizes well-known problems, including the knapsack and b -matching problems. When all demands are 1, we have the integer multicommodity flow problem. Garg et al. [1997] had shown that this problem is NP-hard and gave a 2-approximation algorithm for the cardinality case (all profits are 1) via a primal-dual algorithm. Our main result establishes that the integrality gap of the natural linear programming relaxation is at most 4 for the case of arbitrary profits. Our proof is based on coloring paths on trees and this has other applications for wavelength assignment in optical network routing. We then consider the problem with arbitrary demands. When the maximum demand d max is at most the minimum edge capacity u min , we show that the integrality gap of the LP is at most 48. This result is obtained by showing that the integrality gap for the demand version of such a problem is at most 11.542 times that for the unit-demand case. We use techniques of Kolliopoulos and Stein [2004, 2001] to obtain this. We also obtain, via this method, improved algorithms for line and ring networks. Applications and connections to other combinatorial problems are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".