On two sequential problems : the load planning and sequencing problem and the non-normal recurrent neural network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work in this thesis is separated into two parts. The first part deals with the load planning and sequencing problem for double-stack intermodal railcars, an operational problem found at many rail container terminals. In this problem, containers must be assigned to a platform on which the container will be loaded, and the loading order must be determined. These decisions are made with the objective of minimizing the costs associated with handling the containers, as well as minimizing the cost of containers left behind. The deterministic version of the problem can be cast as a shortest path problem on an ordered graph. This problem is challenging to solve because of the large size of the graph. We propose a two-stage heuristic based on the Iterative Deepening A* algorithm to compute solutions to the load planning and sequencing problem within a five-minute time budget. Next, we also illustrate how a Deep Q-learning algorithm can be used to heuristically solve the same problem.The second part of this thesis considers sequential models in deep learning. A recent strategy to circumvent the exploding and vanishing gradient problem in recurrent neural networks (RNNs) is to enforce recurrent weight matrices to be orthogonal or unitary. While this ensures stable dynamics during training, it comes at the cost of reduced expressivity due to the limited variety of orthogonal transformations. We propose a parameterization of RNNs, based on the Schur decomposition, that mitigates the exploding and vanishing gradient problem, while allowing for non-orthogonal recurrent weight matrices in the model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".