MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807502981 · doi:10.4230/lipics.isaac.2018.14

An O(n^2 log^2 n) Time Algorithm for Minmax Regret Minsum Sink on Path Networks

2018· preprint· en· W2807502981 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Binay Bhattacharya, Yuya Higashikawa, Tsunehiko Kameda, Naoki Katoh

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRegretSink (geography)Path (computing)Aggregate (composite)MinimaxComputer scienceOperations researchMathematical economicsEconomicsMathematicsComputer networkGeographyCartographyMachine learningMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evacuation in emergency situations can be modeled by a dynamic flow network. Two criteria have been used before: one is the evacuation completion time and the other is the aggregate evacuation time of individual evacuees. The aim of this paper is to optimize the aggregate evacuation time in the simplest case, where the network is a path and only one evacuation center (called a sink) is to be introduced. The evacuees are initially located at the vertices, but their precise numbers are unknown, and are given by upper and lower bounds. Under this assumption, we compute the sink location that minimizes the maximum "regret." We present an $O(n^2\log n)$ time algorithm to solve this problem, improving upon the previously fastest $O(n^3)$ time algorithm, where $n$ is the number of vertices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207