Sensitivity Analysis In Linear And Convex Quadratic Optimization: Invariant Active Constraint Set And Invariant Set Intervals<sup>*</sup>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Support set invariancy sensitivity analysis is concerned with the finding the range of parameter variation so thai the perturbed problem has still an optimal solution with the same support set that Ihe given optimal solution of the unperturbed problem has. This type of sensitivity analysis in linear and convex quadratic optimization has been recently studied by Ghaffari and Terlaky by restricting their interest on finding this range for primal optimal solutions of Ihese problems. They referred to the range of the parameter as inviiriant support set interval.In this paper, we consider the question: "what the range of the parameter is. where for each parameter value in this range, a dual t)ptinial solution exists with exactly the same set of positive dual slack variables as for the current dual optimal solution.'". Further, the concept of invariant set interval is introduced that is the parameter range, where both the primal variable and the dual slack variable in an optimal solution for each parameter value have invariant support .sets. We present computational methods to identify these intervals and investigate their interrelationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it