MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393160751 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i18.30062

Parallel Beam Search Algorithms for Domain-Independent Dynamic Programming

2024· article· en· W4393160751 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryo Kuroiwa, J. Christopher Beck

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDynamic programmingComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)AlgorithmParallel computingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domain-independent dynamic programming (DIDP), a model-based paradigm based on dynamic programming, has shown promising performance on multiple combinatorial optimization problems compared with mixed integer programming (MIP) and constraint programming (CP). The current DIDP solvers are based on heuristic search, and the state-of-the-art solver, complete anytime beam search (CABS), uses beam search. However, the current DIDP solvers cannot utilize multiple threads, unlike state-of-the-art MIP and CP solvers. In this paper, we propose three parallel beam search algorithms and develop multi-thread implementations of CABS. With 32 threads, our multi-thread DIDP solvers achieve 9 to 39 times speedup on average and significant performance improvement over the sequential solver, finding the new best solutions for two instances of the traveling salesperson problem with time windows. In addition, our solvers outperform multi-thread MIP and CP solvers in four of the six combinatorial optimization problems evaluated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207