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

Improved Algorithm for the Incremental Assignment Problem

2021· article· en· W3202113264 on OpenAlexaff
Pinzhi Wang, Youssou Gningue, Haibin Zhu

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPiC series in computingSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207