Improved Primal Simplex: A More General Theoretical Framework and an Extended Experimental Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose a general framework for an algorithm derived from the primal simplex that guarantees a strict improvement in the objective after each iteration. Our approach relies on the identification of compatible variables that ensure a nondegenerate iteration if pivoted into the basis. The problem of finding a strict improvement in the objective function is proved to be equivalent to two smaller problems, respectively, focusing on compatible and incompatible variables. We then show that the improved primal simplex (IPS) is a particular implementation of this generic theoretical framework. The resulting new description of IPS naturally emphasizes what should be considered as necessary adaptations of the framework versus specific implementation choices. This provides original insight into IPS that allows for the identification of weaknesses and potential alternative choices that would extend the efficiency of the method to a wider set of problems. We perform experimental tests on an extended collection of data sets including instances of Mittelmann’s benchmark for linear programming. The results confirm the excellent potential of IPS and highlight some of its limits while showing a path toward an improved implementation of the generic algorithm.
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 | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".