MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414427227 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2024.0775

Learning in Reformulation-Linearization Technique-Based Spatial Branching: Limitations of Strong Branching Imitation

2025· article· en· W4414427227 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brais González-Rodríguez, Ignacio Gómez-Casares, Bissan Ghaddar, Julio González-Díaz, Beatriz Pateiro‐López

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBranching (polymer chemistry)SoftwareContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Integer programmingLinear programmingSoftware developmentDecision support system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last few years, there has been a surge in the use of learning techniques to improve the performance of optimization algorithms. In particular, the learning of branching rules in mixed integer linear programming has received a lot of attention, with most methodologies based on strong branching imitation. Recently, some advances have been made as well in the context of nonlinear programming, with some methodologies focusing on learning to select the best branching rule among a predefined set of rules, leading to promising results. In this paper, we explore, in the nonlinear setting, the limits on the improvements that might be achieved by the above two approaches when using reformulation-linearization technique-based relaxations for solving polynomial optimization problems: learning to select the best variable (strong branching) and learning to select the best rule (rule selection). History: Accepted by Andrea Lodi, Area Editor for Design & Analysis of Algorithms–Discrete. Funding: Financial support from Consellería de Cultura, Educación e Ordenación Universitaria, Xunta de Galicia [Grants ED431C-2021/24, MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, PID2020-116587GB-I00, and PID2021-124030NB-C32] is gratefully acknowledged. I. Gómez-Casares received financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Education [FPU Grant 20/01555]. B. Ghaddar received financial support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [Discovery Grants RGPIN-2017-04185 and RGPIN-2025-04585] and the John Thompson Chair Fellowship. 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.2024.0775 ) as well as from the IJOC GitHub software repository ( https://github.com/INFORMSJoC/2024.0775 ). 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS journal on computingSame topicModel Reduction and Neural NetworksFrench-language works237,207