MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378946013 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.19176

Sparse dynamic discretization discovery via arc-dependent time discretizations

2023· preprint· en· W4378946013 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Madison Van Dyk, Jochen Koenemann

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDiscretizationComputer scienceNode (physics)Time horizonSet (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationGraphTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While many time-dependent network design problems can be formulated as time-indexed formulations with strong relaxations, the size of these formulations depends on the discretization of the time horizon and can become prohibitively large. The recently-developed dynamic discretization discovery (DDD) method allows many time-dependent problems to become more tractable by iteratively solving instances of the problem on smaller networks where each node has its own discrete set of departure times. However, in the current implementation of DDD, all arcs departing a common node share the same set of departure times. This causes DDD to be ineffective for solving problems where all near-optimal solutions require many distinct departure times at the majority of the high-degree nodes in the network. Region-based networks are one such structure that often leads to many high-degree nodes, and their increasing popularity underscores the importance of tailoring solution methods for these networks. To improve methods for solving problems that require many departure times at nodes, we develop a DDD framework where the set of departure times is determined on the arc level rather than the node level. We apply this arc-based DDD method to instances of the service network design problem (SND). We show that an arc-based approach is particularly advantageous when instances arise from region-based networks, and when candidate paths are fixed in the base graph for each commodity. Moreover, our algorithm builds upon the existing DDD framework and achieves these improvements with only benign modifications to the original implementation.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207