MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409889158 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2024.0686

Solving Combinatorial Pricing Problems Using Embedded Dynamic Programming Models

2025· article· en· W4409889158 on OpenAlexaffabout
Minh Bui, Margarida Carvalho, José Soares Ferreira Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransportation Planning and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDynamic programmingMathematical optimizationCombinatorial algorithmsInteger programmingCombinatorial optimizationMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combinatorial pricing problem (CPP) is a bilevel problem in which the leader maximizes their revenue by imposing tolls on certain items that they can control. Based on the tolls set by the leader, the follower selects a subset of items corresponding to an optimal solution of a combinatorial optimization problem. To accomplish the leader’s goal, the tolls need to be sufficiently low to discourage the follower from choosing the items offered by the competitors. In this paper, we derive a single-level reformulation for the CPP by rewriting the follower’s problem as a longest path problem using a dynamic programming model and then taking its dual and applying strong duality. We proceed to solve the reformulation in a dynamic fashion with a cutting plane method. We apply this methodology to two distinct dynamic programming models—namely, a novel formulation designated as the selection diagram and the well-known decision diagram. We also produce numerical results to evaluate their performances across three different specializations of the CPP and a closely related problem that is the knapsack interdiction problem. Our results showcase the potential of the two proposed reformulations over the natural value function approach, expanding the set of tools to solve combinatorial bilevel programs. History: Accepted by Andrea Lodi, Area Editor for Design & Analysis of Algorithms–Discrete. Funding: Financial support from IVADO and Fonds de recherche du Québec [FRQ-IVADO Research Chair], and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [Grants 2019-04557 and 2024-04051] is gratefully acknowledged. Supplemental Material: The software that supports the findings of this study is available within the paper and its Supplemental Information ( https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/suppl/10.1287/ijoc.2024.0686 ) as well as from the IJOC GitHub software repository ( https://github.com/INFORMSJoC/2024.0686 ). The complete IJOC Software and Data Repository is available at https://informsjoc.github.io/ .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS journal on computingSame topicTransportation Planning and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207