Competitive Algorithms for the Online Multiple Knapsack Problem with Application to Electric Vehicle Charging
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce and study a general version of the fractional online knapsack problem with multiple knapsacks, heterogeneous constraints on which items can be assigned to which knapsack, and rate-limiting constraints on the assignment of items to knapsacks. This problem generalizes variations of the knapsack problem and of the one-way trading problem that have previously been treated separately, and additionally finds application to the real-time control of electric vehicle (EV) charging. We introduce a new algorithm that achieves a competitive ratio within an additive factor of the best achievable competitive ratios for the general problem and matches or improves upon the best-known competitive ratio for special cases in the knapsack and one-way trading literatures. Moreover, our analysis provides a novel approach to online algorithm design based on an instance-dependent primal-dual analysis that connects the identification of worst-case instances to the design of algorithms. Finally, in the full version of this paper, we illustrate the proposed algorithm via trace-based experiments of EV charging.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it