MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010739339 · doi:10.1287/opre.2019.1892

The Benders Dual Decomposition Method

2020· article· en· W3010739339 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenders' decompositionMathematical optimizationBenchmark (surveying)DecompositionDual (grammatical number)Decomposition method (queueing theory)ExploitInteger programmingInteger (computer science)Computer scienceNode (physics)MathematicsAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many methods that have been proposed to solve large-scale MILP problems rely on the use of decomposition strategies. These methods exploit either the primal or dual structures of the problems by applying the Benders decomposition or Lagrangian dual decomposition strategy, respectively. In “The Benders Dual Decomposition Method,” Rahmaniani, Ahmed, Crainic, Gendreau, and Rei propose a new and high-performance approach that combines the complementary advantages of both strategies. The authors show that this method (i) generates stronger feasibility and optimality cuts compared with the classical Benders method, (ii) can converge to the optimal integer solution at the root node of the Benders master problem, and (iii) is capable of generating high-quality incumbent solutions at the early iterations of the algorithm. The developed algorithm obtains encouraging computational results when used to solve various benchmark MILP 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.255 · 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