MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097495674 · doi:10.1016/j.ejtl.2020.100023

Learning to handle parameter perturbations in Combinatorial Optimization: An application to facility location

2020· article· en· W3097495674 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

VenueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploitA priori and a posterioriComputer scienceOptimization problemMathematical optimizationClassifier (UML)Combinatorial optimizationContext (archaeology)Variation (astronomy)Constraint (computer-aided design)Perspective (graphical)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an approach to couple the resolution of Combinatorial Optimization problems with methods from Machine Learning. Specifically, our study is framed in the context where a reference discrete optimization problem is given and there exist data for many variations of such reference problem (historical or simulated) along with their optimal solution. Those variations can be originated by disruption but this is not necessarily the case. We study how one can exploit these to make predictions about an unseen new variation of the reference instance. The methodology is composed by two steps. We demonstrate how a classifier can be built from these data to determine whether the solution to the reference problem still applies to a perturbed instance. In case the reference solution is only partially applicable, we build a regressor indicating the magnitude of the expected change, and conversely how much of it can be kept for the perturbed instance. This insight, derived from a priori information, is expressed via an additional constraint in the original mathematical programming formulation. We present the methodology through an application to the classical facility location problem and we provide an empirical evaluation and discuss the benefits, drawbacks and perspectives of such an approach. Although it cannot be used in a black-box manner, i.e., it has to be adapted to the specific application at hand, we believe that the approach developed here is general and explores a new perspective on the exploitation of past experience in Combinatorial Optimization.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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