MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577609954

Explorations of Quantum-Classical Approaches to Scheduling a Mars Lander Activity Problem

2016· article· en· W2577609954 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

VenueNational Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMars landingMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)QuantumQuantum computerMars Exploration ProgramAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsExploration of Mars
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An effective approach to solving problems involving mixed (continuous and discrete) variables and constraints, such as hybrid systems, is to decompose them into subproblems and integrate dedicated solvers geared toward those subproblems. Here, we introduce a new framework based on a tree search algorithm to solve hybrid discrete-continuous problems that incorporates: (1) a quantum annealer that samples from the configuration space for the discrete portion and provides information about the quality of the samples, and (2) a classical computer that makes use of information from the quantum annealer to prune and focus the search as well as check a continuous constraint. We consider four variants of our algorithm, each with progressively more guidance from the results provided by the quantum annealer. We empirically test our algorithm and compare the variants on a simplified Mars Lander task scheduling problem. Variants with more guidance from the quantum annealer have better performance.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.494
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.114 · 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