MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225486508 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2022.3168280

Sparse and Low-Rank Optimization for Pliable Index Coding via Alternating Projection

2022· article· en· W4225486508 on OpenAlexaff
Min Fu, Tao Jiang, Hayoung Choi, Yong Zhou, Yuanming Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shanghai
KeywordsCoding (social sciences)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationGreedy algorithmAlgorithmConvergence (economics)Sparse matrixTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pliable index coding (PICOD) has recently been regarded as a promising solution that exploits the coding advantage to improve communication efficiency of content-type systems (e.g., recommendation system), where clients are pliable and are interested in receiving any new message that they do not have. PICOD aims to find an effective coding strategy that satisfies the demands of all clients with the minimum number of transmissions. However, most of the previous works mainly provided theoretical understanding on PICOD in special instances based on greedy algorithms. In contrast, in this paper, we present a flexible sparse and low-rank matrix modeling approach to minimize the number of transmissions for the general PICOD problems. This is achieved by establishing generalized pliable alignment conditions to guarantee the requirements of all clients. As the resulting non-convex problem is highly intractable, we further develop an alternating pursuit framework to detect the rank of the matrix to be recovered by using the rank-increasing strategy. To address the feasibility-detection issues in the existing methods, we propose an alternating projection algorithm, which admits closed-form expressions and avoids excessive sparsity inducing. Moreover, we establish the global convergence of the alternating projection algorithm with random initial points. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed alternating pursuit algorithm significantly reduces the number of transmissions compared to the state-of-the-art methods.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207