Evaluating Curriculum Learning Strategies in Neural Combinatorial Optimization
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural combinatorial optimization (NCO) aims at designing problem-independent and efficient neural network-based strategies for solving combinatorial problems. The field recently experienced growth by successfully adapting architectures originally designed for machine translation. Even though the results are promising, a large gap still exists between NCO models and classic deterministic solvers, both in terms of accuracy and efficiency. One of the drawbacks of current approaches is the inefficiency of training on multiple problem sizes. Curriculum learning strategies have been shown helpful in increasing performance in the multi-task setting. In this work, we focus on designing a curriculum learning-based training procedure that can help existing architectures achieve competitive performance on a large range of problem sizes simultaneously. We provide a systematic investigation of several training procedures and use the insights gained to motivate application of a psychologically-inspired approach to improve upon the classic curriculum method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it