Strong Algorithms for the Ordinal Matroid Secretary Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the ordinal matroid secretary problem (MSP), candidates do not reveal numerical weights, but the decision maker can still discern if a candidate is better than another. An algorithm [Formula: see text] is probability-competitive if every element from the optimum appears with probability [Formula: see text] in the output. This measure is stronger than the standard utility competitiveness. Our main result is the introduction of a technique based on forbidden sets to design algorithms with strong probability-competitive ratios on many matroid classes. We improve upon the guarantees for almost every matroid class considered in the MSP literature. In particular, we achieve probability-competitive ratios of 4 for graphic matroids and of [Formula: see text] for laminar matroids. Additionally, we modify Kleinberg’s [Formula: see text] utility-competitive algorithm for uniform matroids of rank [Formula: see text] in order to obtain a [Formula: see text] probability-competitive algorithm. We also contribute algorithms for the ordinal MSP on arbitrary matroids.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".