MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409351598 · doi:10.1016/j.dche.2025.100236

Advances to modeling and solving infinite-dimensional optimization problems in InfiniteOpt.jl

2025· article· en· W4409351598 on OpenAlexafffund
Evelyn Gondosiswanto, Joshua L. Pulsipher

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsApplied mathematicsMathematicsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceCalculus (dental)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207