MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412604322 · doi:10.1080/03155986.2025.2535919

Strict complementarity and non-degeneracy of solutions to copositive programming problems

2025· article· en· W4412604322 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplementarity (molecular biology)Degeneracy (biology)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsMixed complementarity problemComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematical economicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsNonlinear systemBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a pair of primal-dual linear conic optimization problems over the copositive and completely positive cones. Based on known general definitions, we provide several novel necessary and sufficient conditions for primal and dual strict complementarity and non-degeneracy for problems under consideration. These conditions take into account the specifics of the copositive and completely positive cones and have more clear form than the conditions from the known definitions. Some illustrative examples are provided.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.322 · 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