Max-Sum Diversification, Monotone Submodular Functions, and Dynamic Updates
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
Result diversification is an important aspect in web-based search, document summarization, facility location, portfolio management, and other applications. Given a set of ranked results for a set of objects (e.g., web documents, facilities, etc.) with a distance between any pair, the goal is to select a subset S satisfying the following three criteria: (a) the subset S satisfies some constraint (e.g., bounded cardinality), (b) the subset contains results of high “quality,” and (c) the subset contains results that are “diverse” relative to the distance measure. The goal of result diversification is to produce a diversified subset while maintaining high quality as much as possible. We study a broad class of problems where the distances are a metric, where the constraint is given by independence in a matroid, where quality is determined by a monotone submodular function and diversity is defined as the sum of distances between objects in S . Our problem is a generalization of the max-sum diversification problem studied in Gollapudi and Sharma [2009], which in turn is a generalization of the max-sum p-dispersion problem studied extensively in location theory. It is NP-hard even with the triangle inequality. We propose two simple and natural algorithms: a greedy algorithm for a cardinality constraint and a local search algorithm for an arbitrary matroid constraint. We prove that both algorithms achieve constant approximation ratios.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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