Advances to modeling and solving infinite-dimensional optimization problems in InfiniteOpt.jl
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper details two extensions for the unifying abstraction behind InfiniteOpt.jl : infinite-dimensional generalized disjunctive programming (InfiniteGDP) and GPU-compatible direct transcription solution techniques with an abstraction called InfiniteSIMD-NLP. InfiniteOpt.jl is a Julia package that provides an efficient framework for formulating and solving a wide range of infinite-dimensional optimization (InfiniteOpt) problems. The InfiniteGDP abstraction builds upon traditional GDP techniques to enable intuitive modeling of discrete events and complex logic over continuous domains (e.g., position, time, and/or uncertainty); this abstraction is implemented in InfiniteDisjunctiveProgramming.jl . Moreover, the InfiniteSIMD-NLP abstraction, implemented in InfiniteExaModels.jl , exploits the recurrent structure of transcribed InfiniteOpt problems to efficiently discretize, differentiate, and solve such problems on high performance CPU and GPU architectures. We use a diverse set of case studies in dynamic, PDE-constrained, and stochastic optimization to demonstrate the relative merits of these abstraction extensions. The results demonstrate the utility of the InfiniteGDP abstraction to model continuous space–time switching constraints and how the InfiniteSIMD-NLP abstraction is able to accelerate the solution of InfiniteOpt problems by one to two orders-of-magnitude relative to existing state-of-the-art approaches.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 it