MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319215029 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2023.0019

A Dedicated Pricing Algorithm to Solve a Large Family of Nurse Scheduling Problems with Branch-and-Price

2024· article· en· W4319215029 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

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationScheduling (production processes)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we describe a branch-and-price algorithm for the personalized nurse scheduling problem. The variants that appear in the literature involve a large number of constraints that can be hard or soft, meaning that they can be violated at the price of a penalty. We capture the diversity of the constraints on individual schedules by seven generic constraints characterized by lower and upper bounds on a given quantity. The core of the column generation procedure is in the identification of individual schedules with minimum reduced cost. For this, we solve a shortest path problem with resource constraints (SPPRC) where several generic constraints are modeled as resource constraints. We then describe dominance rules adapted to the presence of both upper and lower bounds on the resources and leverage soft constraints to improve the dominance. We also describe several acceleration techniques for the solution of the SPPRC, and branching rules that fit the specificities of the problem. Our numerical experiments are based on the instances of three benchmarks of the literature including those of the two international nurse rostering competitions (INRC-I and INRC-II). Their objective is threefold: assess the dominance rules and the acceleration techniques, investigate the capacity of the algorithm to find provable optimal solutions of instances that are still open, and conduct a comparison with best published results. The most noticeable conclusion is that the improved solution of the SPPRC allows to solve optimally all the INRC-II instances where a four-week planning horizon is considered and 40% of the eight-week instances. History: Accepted by Andrea Lodi, Area Editor for Design & Analysis of Algorithms–Discrete. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2023.0019 .

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.305 · 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