MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609524338

ILP Formulations for the RWA Problem - Symmetric Systems

2004· article· en· W2609524338 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteger programmingLinear programmingRelaxation (psychology)Linear programming relaxationMathematical optimizationRouting and wavelength assignmentPath (computing)Routing (electronic design automation)MathematicsNotationInteger (computer science)Computer scienceAlgorithmWavelength-division multiplexingWavelength
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different integer linear programming (ILP) formulations have been proposed for the routing and wavelength assignment problem in WDM optical networks, mainly for asymmetrical systems, more than for symmetrical systems, under different objectives. We propose a synthesis of the mathematical models for symmetrical systems, with a unified and simplified notation for four widely used objectives. As for asymmetrical traffic models (Jaumard, Meyer and Thiongane, 2004), we show that all formulations, both link and path formulations, are equivalent in terms of the bound values provided by the optimal solution of their linear programming relaxation, although their number of variables and constraints differ. We propose an experimental comparison of the linear relaxation bounds with the optimal ILP solutions whenever it is possible, for several network and

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207