MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381568467 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.10835

Online Dynamic Submodular Optimization

2023· preprint· en· W4381568467 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Antoine Lesage‐Landry, Julien Pallage

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Valorisation des Données
KeywordsSubmodular set functionRegretMathematical optimizationOnline algorithmComputer scienceGradient descentFunction (biology)Optimization problemTime horizonUpper and lower boundsApproximation algorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose new algorithms with provable performance for online binary optimization subject to general constraints and in dynamic settings. We consider the subset of problems in which the objective function is submodular. We propose the online submodular greedy algorithm (OSGA) which solves to optimality an approximation of the previous round loss function to avoid the NP-hardness of the original problem. We extend OSGA to a generic approximation function. We show that OSGA has a dynamic regret bound similar to the tightest bounds in online convex optimization with respect to the time horizon and the cumulative round optimum variation. For instances where no approximation exists or a computationally simpler implementation is desired, we design the online submodular projected gradient descent (OSPGD) by leveraging the Lovaśz extension. We obtain a regret bound that is akin to the conventional online gradient descent (OGD). Finally, we numerically test our algorithms in two power system applications: fast-timescale demand response and real-time distribution network reconfiguration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.021 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207