MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315489093 · doi:10.1109/cdc51059.2022.9992909

Informative Path Planning in Random Fields via Mixed Integer Programming

2022· article· en· W4315489093 on OpenAlexafffund
Shamak Dutta, Nils Wilde, Stephen L. Smith

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInteger programmingMathematical optimizationInteger (computer science)CovariancePath (computing)EstimatorMathematicsLinear programmingSet (abstract data type)Quadratic programmingComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new mixed integer formulation for the discrete informative path planning problem in random fields. The objective is to compute a budget constrained path while collecting measurements whose linear estimate results in minimum error over a finite set of prediction locations. The problem is known to be NP-hard. However, we strive to compute optimal solutions by leveraging advances in mixed integer optimization. Our approach is based on expanding the search space so we optimize not only over the collected measurement subset, but also over the class of all linear estimators. This allows us to formulate a mixed integer quadratic program that is convex in the continuous variables. The formulations are general and are not restricted to any covariance structure of the field. In simulations, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach over previous branch and bound algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207