MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2728582604 · doi:10.14279/depositonce-14266

On Compact Formulations for Integer Programs Solved by Column Generation

2003· article· en· W2728582604 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

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisHEC MontréalKronos (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColumn generationMathematicsDiagonalMathematical optimizationInteger (computer science)Branching (polymer chemistry)Integer programmingCompatibility (geochemistry)Computer scienceEngineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Column generation has become a powerful tool in solving large scale integer programs. It is well known that most of the often reported compatibility issues between pricing subproblem and branching rule disappear when branching decisions are based on imposing constraints on the subproblem's variables. This can be generalized to branching on variables of a so-called compact formulation. We constructively show that such a formulation always exists under mild assumptions. It has a block diagonal structure with identical subproblems, each of which contributes only one column in an integer solution. This construction has an interpretation as reversing a Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition. Our proposal opens the way for the development of branching rules adapted to the subproblem's structure and to the linking constraints.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · 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