MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336488339

Solving Exam Timetabling Problems with the Flex-Deluge Algorithm

2006· article· en· W2336488339 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmFile Transfer ProtocolOperations researchArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming languageWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this abstract we present a new exam timetabling algorithm together with a set of results on the university exam timetabling problems from the University of Toronto collection, available at ftp://ftp.mie.utoronto.ca/pub/carter/testprob/. A number of recent papers have studied these problems e.g. Carter et al. [7], Caramia et al. [6], Casey & Thompson [8], Abdullah et al. [1], Burke et al. [2],[4]. We will compare the results of our new algorithm against these results. In [4] and [5], we investigated a Great Deluge algorithm for exam timetabling. The basic algorithm was introduced by Dueck [11] and accepts a candidate solution if it satisfies the following conditions:

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Timetabling SolutionsFrench-language works237,207