Proceedings of the XIII Global Optimization Workshop: GOW'16
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
[Excerpt] Preface: Past Global Optimization Workshop shave been held in Sopron (1985 and 1990), Szeged (WGO, 1995), Florence (GO’99, 1999), Hanmer Springs (Let’s GO, 2001), Santorini (Frontiers in GO, 2003), San José (Go’05, 2005), Mykonos (AGO’07, 2007), Skukuza (SAGO’08, 2008), Toulouse (TOGO’10, 2010), Natal (NAGO’12, 2012) and Málaga (MAGO’14, 2014) with the aim of stimulating discussion between senior and junior researchers on the topic of Global Optimization. In 2016, the XIII Global Optimization Workshop (GOW’16) takes place in Braga and is organized by three researchers from the University of Minho. Two of them belong to the Systems Engineering and Operational Research Group from the Algoritmi Research Centre and the other to the Statistics, Applied Probability and Operational Research Group from the Centre of Mathematics. The event received more than 50 submissions from 15 countries from Europe, South America and North America. We want to express our gratitude to the invited speaker Panos Pardalos for accepting the invitation and sharing his expertise, helping us to meet the workshop objectives. GOW’16 would not have been possible without the valuable contribution from the authors and the International Scientific Committee members. We thank you all. This proceedings book intends to present an overview of the topics that will be addressed in the workshop with the goal of contributing to interesting and fruitful discussions between the authors and participants. After the event, high quality papers can be submitted to a special issue of the Journal of Global Optimization dedicated to the workshop. [...]
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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