MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996630002

Solving Traveling Salesman Problem With a non-complete Graph

2010· dissertation· en· W6996630002 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicle Routing Optimization Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsTravelling salesman problemGraphSet (abstract data type)Complete graphObstacle2-optChristofides algorithmShortest path problem
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the simplest, but still NP-hard, routing problems is the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). In the TSP, one is given a set of cities and a way of measuring the distance between cities. One has to find the shortest tour that visits all cities exactly once and returns back to the starting city. In state-of-the-art algorithms, they all assume that a complete graph is given as an input. However, for very large graphs, generating all edges in a complete graph, which corresponds to finding shortest paths for all city pairs, could be time-consuming. This is definitely a major obstacle for some real-life applications, especially when the tour needs to be generated in real-time. The objective, in this thesis, is to find a near-optimal TSP tour with a reduced set of edges in the complete graph. In particular, the following problems are investigated: which subset of edges can be produced in a shorter time comparing to the time for generating the complete graph? Is there a subset of edges in the complete graph that results in a better near-optimal tour than other sets? With a non-complete graph, which improvement algorithms work better? In this thesis, we study six algorithms to generate subsets of edges in a complete graph. To evaluate the proposed algorithms, extensive experiments are conducted with the well-known TSP data in a TSP library. In these experiments, we evaluate these algorithms in terms of tour quality, time and scalability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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