MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sufficiency and Duality for Interval-Valued Optimization Problems with Vanishing Constraints Using Weak Constraint Qualifications

2020· article· en· W3118572724 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Analysis and Applications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
KeywordsMathematicsDuality (order theory)Strong dualityConvexityWolfe dualityWeak dualityInterval (graph theory)Duality gapConstraint (computer-aided design)Mathematical optimizationPerturbation functionDual (grammatical number)Optimization problemClass (philosophy)Applied mathematicsMathematical economicsPure mathematicsConvex analysisConvex optimizationCombinatoricsRegular polygonComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we are concerned with one of the difficult class of optimization problems called the interval-valued optimization problem with vanishing constraints. Sufficient optimality conditions for a LU optimal solution are derived under generalized convexity assumptions. Moreover, appropriate duality results are discussed for a Mond-Weir type dual problem. In addition, numerical examples are given to support the sufficient optimality conditions and weak duality theorem.

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 score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.265 · 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