Extreme-Point-based Heuristics for the Three-Dimensional Bin Packing problem
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
One of the main issues in addressing three-dimensional packing problems is finding an efficient and accurate definition of the points at which to place the items inside the bins, because the performance of exact and heuristic solution methods is actually strongly influenced by the choice of a placement rule. We introduce the extreme point concept and present a new extreme point-based rule for packing items inside a three-dimensional container. The extreme point rule is independent from the particular packing problem addressed and can handle additional constraints, such as fixing the position of the items. The new extreme point rule is also used to derive new constructive heuristics for the three-dimensional bin-packing problem. Extensive computational results show the effectiveness of the new heuristics compared to state-of-the-art results. Moreover, the same heuristics, when applied to the two-dimensional bin-packing problem, outperform those specifically designed for the problem
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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