Leaders and followers — A new metaheuristic to avoid the bias of accumulated information
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
Finding good solutions on multi-modal optimization problems depends mainly on the efficacy of exploration. However, many search techniques applied to multi-modal problems were initially conceptualized with unimodal functions in mind, prioritizing exploitation over exploration. In this paper, we perform a study on the efficacy of exploration under random sampling, which leads to the identification of an important comparison bias that occurs when a solution which has benefited from local search is compared to the first (random) solution in a new search area. With the goal of eliminating this bias and improving the efficacy of exploration, we have developed a new search technique explicitly designed for multi-modal search spaces. “Leaders and Followers” aims to eliminate the negative effects of information accumulation and at the same time use the information from the best solutions in a way that they have controlled influence over the newly-sampled solutions. The proposed metaheuristic outperforms both Particle Swarm Optimization and Differential Evolution across a broad range of multi-modal optimization problems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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