Learning Precedences for Scheduling Problems with Graph Neural Networks
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
The resource constrained project scheduling problem (RCPSP) consists of scheduling a finite set of resource-consuming tasks within a temporal horizon subject to resource capacities and precedence relations between pairs of tasks. It is NP-hard and many techniques have been introduced to improve the efficiency of CP solvers to solve it. The problem is naturally represented as a directed graph, commonly referred to as the precedence graph, by linking pairs of tasks subject to a precedence. In this paper, we propose to leverage the ability of graph neural networks to extract knowledge from precedence graphs. This is carried out by learning new precedences that can be used either to add new constraints or to design a dedicated variable-selection heuristic. Experiments carried out on RCPSP instances from PSPLIB show the potential of learning to predict precedences and how they can help speed up the search for solutions by a CP solver.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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