Optimization of two-dimensional irregular bin packing problem considering slit distance and free rotation of pieces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a two-dimensional irregular bin packing problem (2DIBPP) that takes into account the slit distance and allows the pieces to rotate freely. The target is to arrange a specified collection of pieces with irregular shapes into a minimal number of bins. Firstly, we develop a mathematical model for the 2DIBPP that considers slit distance and free rotation of the pieces, and an equidistant edge expansion approach is then proposed to handle the slit distance. Secondly, a two-stage method is implemented to get a finite collection of promising rotation angles, effectively decreasing the search neighbourhood. Thirdly, we decompose the 2DIBPP into two sub-problems: piece assignment and packing. The Partial Bin Packing (PBP) strategy is employed in the allocation stage, and we adopt an overlap minimization method to pack the pieces into an individual bin. Finally, we use a local search (LS) algorithm to advance the quality of the solutions by adjusting the piece assignment across bins. Experimental evidence exhibits that our approach is competitive in most instances of the literature, with four better results in five benchmark instances.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".