MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202113264 · doi:10.29007/8d9g

Improved Algorithm for the Incremental Assignment Problem

2021· article· en· W3202113264 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

VenueEPiC series in computing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipartite graphAssignment problemHungarian algorithm3-dimensional matchingMatching (statistics)AlgorithmBlossom algorithmGeneralized assignment problemMathematicsWeapon target assignment problemGraphQuadratic assignment problemMathematical optimizationComputer scienceOptimization problemCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Assignment Problem is a basic combinatorial optimization problem. In a weighted bipartite graph, the Assignment Problem is to find the largest sum of weights matching. The Hungarian method is a well-known algorithm, which is combinatorial optimization. Adding a new row and a new column to a weighted bipartite graph is called the Incremental Assignment Problem (IAP). The algorithm of the Incremental Assignment Problem utilizes the given optimal solution (the maximum weighted matching) and the dual variables to solve the matrix after extending the bipartite graph. This paper proposes an improvement of the Incremental Assignment Algorithm (IAA), named the Improved Incremental Assignment Algorithm (IIAA). The improved algorithm will save the operation time and operation space to find the optimal solution (the maximum weighted matching) of the bipartite graph.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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