Interpolating between $k$-Median and $k$-Center: Approximation Algorithms for Ordered $k$-Median
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a generalization of $k$-median and $k$-center, called the {\em ordered $k$-median} problem. In this problem, we are given a metric space $(\mathcal{D},\{c_{ij}\})$ with $n=|\mathcal{D}|$ points, and a non-increasing weight vector $w\in\mathbb{R}_+^n$, and the goal is to open $k$ centers and assign each point each point $j\in\mathcal{D}$ to a center so as to minimize $w_1\cdot\text{(largest assignment cost)}+w_2\cdot\text{(second-largest assignment cost)}+\ldots+w_n\cdot\text{($n$-th largest assignment cost)}$. We give an $(18+ε)$-approximation algorithm for this problem. Our algorithms utilize Lagrangian relaxation and the primal-dual schema, combined with an enumeration procedure of Aouad and Segev. For the special case of $\{0,1\}$-weights, which models the problem of minimizing the $\ell$ largest assignment costs that is interesting in and of by itself, we provide a novel reduction to the (standard) $k$-median problem showing that LP-relative guarantees for $k$-median translate to guarantees for the ordered $k$-median problem; this yields a nice and clean $(8.5+ε)$-approximation algorithm for $\{0,1\}$ weights.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".