MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393616030 · doi:10.23952/jano.6.2024.2.01

Primal and dual second-order necessary optimality conditions in bilevel programming

2024· article· en· W4393616030 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBilevel optimizationDual (grammatical number)Order (exchange)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceMathematicsEconomicsOptimization problemPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to derive primal and dual second-order necessary optimality conditions for a standard bilevel optimization problem with both smooth and nonsmooth data.The approach involves utilizing two different reformulations of the hierarchical model as a single-level problem under a partial calmness assumption.The first reformulation consists on the use of the value function of the lowerlevel problem, which is then tackled by using second-order directional derivatives.However, for the dual conditions, this approach is not suitable except for cases that the value function is smooth.Therefore, we adopt a second approach that relies on the Ψ-reformulation.In both cases, the obtained necessary optimality conditions can be expressed according to the problem data.Finally, some examples are given to illustrate the proven results.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · 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