MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105897877 · doi:10.23952/jano.7.2025.3.08

A line decomposition algorithm for multiobjective optimization

2025· article· W7105897877 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulti-objective optimizationLine (geometry)DecompositionMinificationOptimization algorithmGenetic algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decomposition techniques are proven highly effective in addressing complexity of optimization problems.For multiobjective optimization problems (MOPs), a variety of objective-space decomposition approaches are developed and applied in practice, while decision-space decomposition remains rather underexplored.We develop a line-decomposition algorithm for computing an approximation of the efficient set of strictly convex MOPs.The feasible region is decomposed into lines whose efficient sets are used to reconstruct the overall efficient set.Because the algorithm relies on solving a collection of single objective line search problems, it is immediately applicable to single-objective optimization with no modifications.We prove the algorithm convergence and provide a preliminary error analysis.The algorithm is implemented in Python and tested on biobjective and single objective problems with bounded variables.Numerical results are also included.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.279 · 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