MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Distributed Newton Algorithm for Optimal Resource Allocation in Multi-Agent Systems

2022· article· en· W4294691862 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 American Control Conference (ACC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Lagrange multiplierComputer scienceResource allocationMathematical optimizationNewton's methodMulti-agent systemDistributed algorithmDistributed computingResource management (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Optimal allocationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the solution of a multi-agent, multi-resource allocation problem using a distributed Newton consensus approach. This technique integrates a Newton consensus method to address the optimization task. The solution requires consensus on each vector of the Lagrange multipliers of the local optimization problems. The agents in the system are expected to collaborate and communicate local information with neighbouring agents over a communication network. In contrast to leading resource allocation techniques, the proposed method avoids the need to impose feasible initial conditions. In addition, the technique does not require any coordination or communication of network wide Lagrange multipliers. A simulation study demonstrates the effectiveness and robustness of this algorithm.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.237 · 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