A Progressive Approximation Approach for the Exact Solution of Sparse Large-Scale Binary Interdiction Games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a progressive approximation algorithm for the exact solution of several classes of interdiction games in which two noncooperative players (namely an attacker and a follower) interact sequentially. The follower must solve an optimization problem that has been previously perturbed by means of a series of attacking actions led by the attacker. These attacking actions aim at augmenting the cost of the decision variables of the follower’s optimization problem. The objective, from the attacker’s viewpoint, is that of choosing an attacking strategy that reduces as much as possible the quality of the optimal solution attainable by the follower. The progressive approximation mechanism consists of the iterative solution of an interdiction problem in which the attacker actions are restricted to a subset of the whole solution space and a pricing subproblem invoked with the objective of proving the optimality of the attacking strategy. This scheme is especially useful when the optimal solutions to the follower’s subproblem intersect with the decision space of the attacker only in a small number of decision variables. In such cases, the progressive approximation method can solve interdiction games otherwise intractable for classical methods. We illustrate the efficiency of our approach on the shortest path, 0-1 knapsack and facility location interdiction games. Summary of Contribution: In this article, we present a progressive approximation algorithm for the exact solution of several classes of interdiction games in which two noncooperative players (namely an attacker and a follower) interact sequentially. We exploit the discrete nature of this interdiction game to design an effective algorithmic framework that improves the performance of general-purpose solvers. Our algorithm combines elements from mathematical programming and computer science, including a metaheuristic algorithm, a binary search procedure, a cutting-planes algorithm, and supervalid inequalities. Although we illustrate our results on three specific problems (shortest path, 0-1 knapsack, and facility location), our algorithmic framework can be extended to a broader class of interdiction problems.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".