A Flexible, Natural Formulation for the Network Design Problem with Vulnerability Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given a graph, a set of origin-destination (OD) pairs with communication requirements, and an integer k ≥ 2, the network design problem with vulnerability constraints (NDPVC) is to identify a subgraph with the minimum total edge costs such that, between each OD pair, there exist a hop-constrained primary path and a hop-constrained backup path after any k − 1 edges of the graph fail. Formulations exist for single-edge failures (i.e., k = 2). To solve the NDPVC for an arbitrary number of edge failures, we develop two natural formulations based on the notion of length-bounded cuts. We compare their strengths and flexibilities in solving the problem for k ≥ 3. We study different methods to separate infeasible solutions by computing length-bounded cuts of a given size. Experimental results show that, for single-edge failures, our formulation increases the number of solved benchmark instances from 61% (obtained within a two-hour limit by the best published algorithm) to more than 95%, thus increasing the number of solved instances by 1,065. Our formulation also accelerates the solution process for larger hop limits and efficiently solves the NDPVC for general k. We test our best algorithm for two to five simultaneous edge failures and investigate the impact of multiple failures on the network design.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".