Accelerated Benders decomposition and local branching for dynamic maximum covering location problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The maximum covering location problem (MCLP) is a key problem in facility location, with many applications and variants. One such variant is the dynamic (or multi-period) MCLP, which considers the installation of facilities across multiple time periods. To the best of our knowledge, no exact solution method has been proposed to tackle large-scale instances of this problem. To that end, in this work, we expand upon the current state-of-the-art branch-and-Benders-cut solution method in the static case, by exploring several acceleration techniques. Additionally, we propose a specialised local branching scheme which exploits the separability of the problem by time period. This scheme uses a novel distance metric in its definition of subproblems and features a new method for efficient and exact solving of the subproblems. These methods are then compared through extensive computational experiments, highlighting the strengths of the proposed methodologies. • We extend the state-of-the-art approach for the static MCLP to the dynamic case. • We detail acceleration techniques for this extended Benders decomposition method. • We develop a specialised local branching scheme which exploits separability. • The accelerated Benders decomposition method outperforms the state-of-the-art. • The local branching method can find better quality solutions in hard instances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".