MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6995491552

Online square packing with prediction

2023· dissertation· en· W6995491552 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimization and Packing Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Bin packing problemUpper and lower boundsCompetitive analysisConsistency (knowledge bases)Mean squared errorUnit square
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bin packing and its variants, such as online square packing, are classic optimization problems with wide-ranging applications in areas like virtual machine consolidation and supply chain management. This thesis investigates the online square packing problem, where the goal is to pack squares of various sizes into the minimum number of unit square bins. We assume the prediction model, which integrates potentially erroneous machine-learned predictions into online algorithms, offering insights about upcoming items in an input sequence. The primary focus of this thesis is to design algorithms that balance consistency (competitive ratio with accurate predictions) and robustness (competitive ratio under adversarial prediction errors), acknowledging the impact of prediction error on algorithm efficiency. This novel approach, diverging from traditional models with perfect foresight or static input distributions, incorporates the practical aspect of erroneous predictions into the study of online problems. The key contribution of this thesis is the development of \fullRap (\RAP), an online square packing algorithm with predictions, which achieves a consistency of $1.78$ and a robustness of $5.89$. \RAP utilizes predictions that are machine-learnable from a polynomial number of input sequence samples. Additionally, an extension of \RAP, \textsc{Adaptive-RAP}, is introduced. This sampling-based algorithm has an expected competitive ratio of at most $2.0885$, the best-known competitive ratio without predictions, and its competitive ratio approaches $1.78$, the consistency of \RAP, as more items are sampled. Furthermore, this work shows a lower bound on the robustness of any online classical bin packing algorithm for any consistency better than $1.3$; similarly, we establish a lower bound for the robustness of online square packing algorithms that have consistency better than $1.25$. These findings contribute to the understanding of the trade-offs between consistency and robustness in online packing problems under the prediction model.

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)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.176 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicOptimization and Packing ProblemsFrench-language works237,207