MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2384669999

The Hungarian method of the competition assignment problem

2006· article· en· W2384669999 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

VenueDongbei Nongye Daxue xuebao · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssignment problemTask (project management)Competition (biology)Scope (computer science)Generalized assignment problemHungarian algorithmComputer scienceWeapon target assignment problemZhàngOperations researchMathematical economicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLawManagementChina
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard assignment problems taking the personnel assignment problem for example,mostly satis-fy the following three assumptions,the number of people is equal to the number of the task;each person com-pletes one and only one task;each task is completed by one and only one person.But in practical applications,most assignment problems are not satisfied with the first assumption,and the second assumption does not accord with the requirements of the enterprises,departments and the society after introducing competition mechanism.To the above drawbacks,Mr.ZHANG Lin has proposed the competition assignment problem,abandoned the former two assumptions,and fundamentally broadened the applicative scope of standard assignment problems.In this article,we emphatically provide the detailed algorithm of the competition assignment problem-the Hungarian method of the competition assignment problem.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.311 · 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