Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Anubhav Singh 0001
dblp:271/6358-1
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-2770-801XORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
1 paper |
Mathematical optimization · 100% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Mathematical optimization › integer programming › branch-and-bound
branch-and-cut |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | New Exact Methods for Solving Quadratic Traveling Salesman Problem · ICAPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization
discrete optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | New Exact Methods for Solving Quadratic Traveling Salesman Problem · ICAPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › evolutionary computation
evolutionary optimization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | New Exact Methods for Solving Quadratic Traveling Salesman Problem · ICAPS 2025 |
Mathematical optimization › combinatorial optimization › vehicle routing
traveling salesman problem |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | New Exact Methods for Solving Quadratic Traveling Salesman Problem · ICAPS 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
mixed integer quadratic programming · 0.9mixed integer linear programming · 0.9hybrid genetic algorithm · 0.9domain-independent dynamic programming · 0.9constraint programming · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | New Exact Methods for Solving Quadratic Traveling Salesman ProblemabstractThe Quadratic Traveling Salesman Problem (QTSP) is a generalization of the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) with important applications in robotics and bioinformatics. The QTSP objective value depends on pairs of consecutive edges in the tour; hence, it is quadratic and generally hard to optimize. While various exact-solving approaches have been explored, many rely on specialized procedures and struggle to scale on large instances. More recently, carefully crafted metaheuristics have demonstrated better primal bounds and scalability, but they cannot provide any guarantees of solution quality nor prove the optimality of any solution. In this work, we propose new exact models for QTSP. We define direct encodings of QTSP in domain-independent dynamic programming (DIDP), constraint programming (CP), mixed integer quadratic programming (MIQP), and mixed integer linear programming (MILP), and compare them with the best-known exact method, a branch and cut (B&C) algorithm, and the state-of-the-art metaheuristic, a hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA). Our experimental results demonstrate that the DIDP model shows better scalability and finds the best feasible solutions on average among all exact solvers, including the B&C algorithm. HGA finds the best feasible solution among all approaches, with DIDP within 15% of the HGA cost on all experimented instances. Also, interestingly, our MILP model with the subtour elimination constraints generally finds better feasible solutions than the B&C algorithm while matching it in proving optimality, suggesting that lazily adding sub-tour elimination cuts is not particularly helpful in QTSP. Anubhav Singh 0001, Ryo Kuroiwa 0002, J. Christopher Beck |
ICAPS | 2 |