MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157126773 · doi:10.1111/itor.12989

An extended ϵ‐constraint method for a multiobjective finite‐horizon Markov decision process

2021· article· en· W3157126773 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

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Mathematical Programming
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationMarkov decision processComputer sciencePareto principleConstraint (computer-aided design)Scheduling (production processes)Markov processSelection (genetic algorithm)Class (philosophy)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A Markov decision process (MDP) is an appropriate mathematical framework for analysis and modeling a large class of sequential decision‐making problems. Real‐world applications necessitate the evaluation of the value of a decision according to several conflicting objectives. This paper presents an extended ϵ‐constraint method for a multiobjective finite‐horizon MDP. This study integrates the ϵ‐constraint method with the K‐ best policies algorithm to find the nondominated deterministic Markovian policies on the Pareto‐optimal frontier. The proposed algorithm is evaluated on biobjective maintenance scheduling and machine running speed selection problems, and its performance is compared with a classic approach in the literature (weighted‐sum, WS, method). Satisfying results show that the proposed algorithm obtains a good‐quality Pareto frontier and has advantages over the WS 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.393 · 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