MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325833190 · doi:10.1287/moor.2015.0758

Facility Location with Client Latencies: LP-Based Techniques for Minimum-Latency Problems

2016· article· en· W2325833190 on OpenAlexaff
Deeparnab Chakrabarty, Chaitanya Swamy

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Operations Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacility location problemSteiner tree problemLatency (audio)Mathematical optimizationApproximation algorithmTotal costComputer scienceMathematicsSet (abstract data type)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a problem that is a common generalization of the uncapacitated facility location (UFL) and minimum latency (ML) problems, where facilities not only need to be opened to serve clients, but also need to be sequentially activated before they can provide service. This abstracts a setting where inventory demanded by customers needs to be stocked or replenished at facilities from a depot or warehouse. Formally, we are given a set ℱ of n facilities with facility-opening costs, a set 𝒟 of m clients, and connection costs c(i, j) specifying the cost of assigning a client j to a facility i, a root node r denoting the depot, and a time metric d() on ℱ ∪ {r}. Our goal is to open a subset of facilities, find a path P starting at r and spanning the open facilities to activate them, and connecting each client j to an open facility so as to minimize the total facility opening cost, the total client connection cost, and the total time of arrivals at each facility along P. We call this the minimum latency uncapacitated facility location (MLUFL) problem. Our main result is an O(log n max(log n, log m))-approximation for MLUFL. Via a reduction to the group Steiner tree (GST) problem, we show this result is tight in the sense that any improvement in the approximation guarantee for MLUFL, implies an improvement in the (currently known) approximation factor for GST. We obtain significantly improved constant approximation guarantees for two natural special cases of the problem: (a) Related MLUFL, where the connection costs form a metric that is a scalar multiple of the time metric; (b) Metric uniform MLUFL, where we have metric connection costs and the time-metric is uniform. Our LP-based methods are fairly versatile and are easily adapted with minor changes to yield approximation guarantees for MLUFL (and ML) in various more general settings, such as (i) the setting where the latency-cost of a client is a function (of bounded growth) of the delay faced by the facility to which it is connected; and (ii) the k-route version, where we can dispatch k vehicles in parallel to activate the open facilities. Our LP-based understanding of MLUFL also offers some LP-based insights into ML. We obtain two natural LP-relaxations for ML with constant integrality gap, which we believe shed new light upon the problem and offer a promising direction for obtaining improvements for ML.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematics of Operations ResearchSame topicVehicle Routing Optimization MethodsFrench-language works237,207