MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182089961 · doi:10.1142/s1469026816500231

A Multi-Phase Hybrid Metaheuristics Approach for the Exam Timetabling

2016· article· en· W2182089961 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

VenueInternational Journal of Computational Intelligence and Applications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMetaheuristicTabu searchSimulated annealingHill climbingBenchmarkingBenchmark (surveying)HeuristicMathematical optimizationPhase (matter)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a Multi-Phase Hybrid Metaheuristics approach for solving the Exam Timetabling Problem (ETP). This approach is defined with three phases: pre-processing phase, construction phase and enhancement phase. The pre-processing phase relies on our variable ordering heuristic as well as a form of transitive closure for discovering implicit constraints. The construction phase uses a variant of the Tabu Search with conflicts dictionary. The enhancement phase includes Hill Climbing (HC), Simulated Annealing (SA) and our updated version of the extended “Great Deluge” algorithm. In order to evaluate the performance of the different phases of our proposed approach, we conducted several experiments on instances taken from ITC 2007 benchmarking datasets. The results are very promising and competitive with the well known ETP solvers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.239 · 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