Machine Learning for Cutting Planes in Mixed Integer Linear Programming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed a number of research efforts to enhance the strength of cutting plane subroutines, specifically cutting plane selection using machine learning (ML). We present Learn2Aggregate, a machine learning (ML) framework for optimizing the generation of Chv\'atal-Gomory (CG) cuts in mixed integer linear programming (MILP). The framework trains a graph neural network to classify useful constraints for aggregation in CG cut generation. The ML-driven CG separator selectively focuses on a small set of impactful constraints, improving runtimes without compromising the strength of the generated cuts. Key to our approach is the formulation of a constraint classification task which favours sparse aggregation of constraints, consistent with empirical findings. This, in conjunction with a careful constraint labeling scheme and a hybrid of deep learning and feature engineering, results in enhanced CG cut generation across five diverse MILP benchmarks. On the largest test sets, our method closes roughly twice as much of the integrality gap as the standard CG method while running 40\% faster. This performance improvement is due to our method eliminating 75\% of the constraints prior to aggregation. Additionally, the thesis presents a comprehensive survey on the use of ML in cut selection and generation, offering a critical examination of existing methodologies and setting the stage for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".