MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583058118

On the Impact of Symmetry-Breaking Constraints on Spatial Branch-and-Bound for Circle Packing in a Square

2011· article· en· W2583058118 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

VenueLes Cahiers du GERAD · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomogeneous spaceSquare (algebra)Symmetry (geometry)Point (geometry)Branch and boundNode (physics)Task (project management)Relaxation (psychology)MathematicsRegular polygonPacking problemsSymmetry breakingSquare rootLinear programming relaxationUpper and lower boundsBranch and cutMathematical optimizationComputer scienceLinear programmingGeometryMathematical analysisPhysicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of packing equal circles in a square from the mathematical programming point of view. We discuss different formulations, we analyze formulation symmetries, we propose some symmetry breaking constraints and show that not only do they tighten the convex relaxation bound, but they also ease the task of local NLP solution algorithms in finding feasible solutions. We solve the problem by means of a standard spatial Branch-and-Bound implementation, and show that our formulation improvements allow the algorithm to find very good solutions at the root node.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.209 · 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