Bibliographic record
Abstract
Submodular functions have found a wealth of new applications in data science and machine learning models in recent years. This has been coupled with many algorithmic advances in the area of submodular optimization: (SO) $\min/\max~f(S): S \in \mathcal{F}$, where $\mathcal{F}$ is a given family of feasible sets over a ground set $V$ and $f:2^V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is submodular. In this work we focus on a more general class of \emph{multivariate submodular optimization} (MVSO) problems: $\min/\max~f (S_1,S_2,\ldots,S_k): S_1 \uplus S_2 \uplus \cdots \uplus S_k \in \mathcal{F}$. Here we use $\uplus$ to denote disjoint union and hence this model is attractive where resources are being allocated across $k$ agents, who share a `joint' multivariate nonnegative objective $f(S_1,S_2,\ldots,S_k)$ that captures some type of submodularity (i.e. diminishing returns) property. We provide some explicit examples and potential applications for this new framework. For maximization, we show that practical algorithms such as accelerated greedy variants and distributed algorithms achieve good approximation guarantees for very general families (such as matroids and $p$-systems). For arbitrary families, we show that monotone (resp. nonmonotone) MVSO admits an $\alpha (1-1/e)$ (resp. $\alpha \cdot 0.385$) approximation whenever monotone (resp. nonmonotone) SO admits an $\alpha$-approximation over the multilinear formulation. This substantially expands the family of tractable models for submodular maximization. For minimization, we show that if SO admits a $\beta$-approximation over \emph{modular} functions, then MVSO admits a $\frac{\beta \cdot n}{1+(n-1)(1-c)}$-approximation where $c\in [0,1]$ denotes the curvature of $f$, and this is essentially tight. Finally, we prove that MVSO has an $\alpha k$-approximation whenever SO admits an $\alpha$-approximation over the convex formulation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
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".