Network design with vulnerability constraints and probabilistic edge reliability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The network design problem with vulnerability constraints and probabilistic edge reliability (NDPVC‐PER) is an extension of the NDPVC obtained by additionally considering edge reliability. We consider the design of a telecommunication network in which every origin‐destination pair is connected by a hop‐constrained primal path, and by a hop‐constrained backup path when certain edges in the network fail. The edge failures occur with respect to their reliability, and the network is designed by considering a minimum reliability level. Therefore, a hop‐constrained backup path must be built by considering all simultaneous edge failures that have a certain probability of realization. While there exist models to solve the NDPVC without enumerating all edge subsets, edge reliability cannot be dealt with by applying the techniques applied to the NDPVC. Therefore, we develop models based on a new concept of resilient length‐bounded cuts, and solve the NDPVC‐PER without edge set enumerations. We perform extensive testing of the model to determine the best performing settings, and demonstrate the computational efficiency of the developed model. Our findings on these instances show that, in the dataset considered in this study, increasing the reliability level from 90% to 95% increases the average cost only by 12.4%, while increasing it from 95% to 99% level yields a cost increase of 93.9%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".