MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293252885 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2022.8.001

Optimization of two-dimensional irregular bin packing problem considering slit distance and free rotation of pieces

2022· article· en· W4293252885 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquidistantBinBin packing problemRotation (mathematics)GRASPAlgorithmBenchmark (surveying)Mathematical optimizationSlitEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMathematicsPacking problemsMinificationComputer scienceGeometryArtificial intelligencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · 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