MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046504554 · doi:10.1287/ijoo.2019.0031

Spatial Separability in Hub Location Problems with an Application to Brain Connectivity Networks

2020· article· en· W3046504554 on OpenAlexaff
Taghi Khaniyev, Samir Elhedhli, Fatih Safa Erenay

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS Journal on Optimization · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProperty (philosophy)Range (aeronautics)Set (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by the need to solve large hub location problems efficiently and accurately, we discover an important characteristic of optimal solutions to p-hub median problems that we call spatial separability. It refers to the partitioning of the network into allocation clusters with nonoverlapping convex hulls. We illustrate numerically that the property persists over a wide range of randomly generated instances and propose a data-driven approach based on an insight from the property to tackle very large problem sizes. Computational experiments corroborate the effectiveness of the proposed approach in generating high-quality solutions within reasonable computational times. We then explore a new application area of hub location problems in brain connectivity networks and introduce the largest and the first set of three-dimensional instances in the literature. Computational results demonstrate the capability of hub location models in successfully depicting the hub organization of the human brain, as validated by the medical literature, thus revealing that hub location models can play an important role in investigating the intricate connectivity of the human brain.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS Journal on OptimizationSame topicPoint processes and geometric inequalitiesFrench-language works237,207