MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Where to Put A Rower: A Novel and Practical Solution to Dragon Boat Partition Problem

2022· article· en· W4310145552 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartition (number theory)HeuristicSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceInteger (computer science)Greedy algorithmMathematical optimizationPartition problemAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCombinatoricsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel and practical approach to the Dragon Boat Partition Problem (DBP), in which we need to assign rowers to the opposite sides of a dragon boat, such that certain requirements are satisfied. An example of the requirements is that weights on the right side and left side are balanced. While DBP is essentially an integer partition problem, it has its own unique characteristics. Our approach is greedy and heuristic and tackles DBP effectively, showing its practicality in real applications. The performance of our proposed approach is demonstrated through a set of simulated experiments and various related issued are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Timetabling SolutionsFrench-language works237,207