Skip to content

feat: Add references to papers that use a problem#193

Open
olafmersmann wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat-reference_types
Open

feat: Add references to papers that use a problem#193
olafmersmann wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat-reference_types

Conversation

@olafmersmann

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Add a type field to references which can take the following values:

  • "definition": Defines or introduces a new thing (problem, algorithm, features, ...)
  • "use": Uses a problem
  • "critique": Discussed the suitability of a problem for some task or field

Updates the examples in the examples/ subdirectory and problems.yaml accordingly.

@kvdblom kvdblom linked an issue Jun 9, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

@kvdblom kvdblom left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor comments only. If we want to make changes based on them, we can do that in new issues.

Ready to merge once decisions (and possible new issues) are made.

Comment thread examples/cobi.py
title="Pareto Set Characterization in Constrained Multiobjective Optimization and the COBI Problem Generator",
authors=["Anne Auger", "Dimo Brockhoff", "Luka Opravš", "Tea Tušar"],
link={"type": "arxiv", "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.09131"},
type="definition"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could it be two (or more?) types? Like we define the problem in the paper, and use it to compare some algorithms? And if so, is that interesting enough that we would want to be able to indicate both types here?

Comment thread problems.yaml
- dim:
max: null
min: 1
type: categorical

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a reminder that the non-deterministic ordering for these generated files is very annoying when reviewing. We should (somewhat) prioritise fixing that. (We should make a new issue for that if we don't have one yet.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add property listing references that solve a problem

2 participants