A fast algorithm for power system optimization problems using an interior point method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variants of simplex-based methodologies are generally used to solve underlying linear programming (LP) problems. An implementation of the dual affine (DA) algorithm (a variant of N. Karmarkar's (1984) interior point method) is described in detail and some computational results are presented. This algorithm is particularly suitable for problems with a large number of constraints, and is applicable to linear and nonlinear optimization problems. In contrast with the simplex method, the number of iterations required by the DA algorithm to solve large-scale problems is relatively small. The DA algorithm has been implemented considering the sparsity of the constraint matrix. The normal equation that is required to be solved in every iteration is solved using a preconditioned conjugate gradient method. An application of the technique to a hydro-scheduling is presented; the largest problem is solved over nine times faster than an efficient simplex (MINOS) code. A new heuristic basis recovery procedure is implemented to provide primal and dual optimal basic solutions which are not generally available if interior point methods are used. The tested examples indicate that this new approach requires less than 10% of the original iterations of the simplex method to find the optimal basis.>
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".