Network Models for Multiobjective Discrete Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides a novel framework for solving multiobjective discrete optimization problems with an arbitrary number of objectives. Our framework represents these problems as network models, in that enumerating the Pareto frontier amounts to solving a multicriteria shortest-path problem in an auxiliary network. We design techniques for exploiting network models in order to accelerate the identification of the Pareto frontier, most notably a number of operations to simplify the network by removing nodes and arcs while preserving the set of nondominated solutions. We show that the proposed framework yields orders-of-magnitude performance improvements over existing state-of-the-art algorithms on five problem classes containing both linear and nonlinear objective functions. Summary of Contribution: Multiobjective optimization has a long history of research with applications in several domains. Our paper provides an alternative modeling and solution approach for multiobjective discrete optimization problems by leveraging graphical structures. Specifically, we encode the decision space of a problem as a layered network and propose graph reduction operators to preserve only solutions whose image are part of the Pareto frontier. The nondominated solutions can then be extracted through shortest-path algorithms on such a network. Numerical results comparing our method with state-of-the-art approaches on several problem classes, including the knapsack, set covering, and the traveling salesperson problem (TSP), suggest orders-of-magnitude runtime speed-ups for exactly enumerating the Pareto frontier, especially when the number of objective functions grows.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".