MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964550805 · doi:10.1115/1.4029219

Trust Region Based Mode Pursuing Sampling Method for Global Optimization of High Dimensional Design Problems

2014· article· en· W1964550805 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanical Design · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurse of dimensionalityComputer scienceMathematical optimizationSampling (signal processing)Mode (computer interface)Genetic algorithmGlobal optimizationHigh dimensionalSuiteOptimization problemAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mode pursuing sampling (MPS) was developed as a global optimization algorithm for design optimization problems involving expensive black box functions. MPS has been found to be effective and efficient for design problems of low dimensionality, i.e., the number of design variables is less than 10. This work integrates the concept of trust regions into the MPS framework to create a new algorithm, trust region based mode pursuing sampling (TRMPS2), with the aim of dramatically improving performance and efficiency for high dimensional problems. TRMPS2 is benchmarked against genetic algorithm (GA), dividing rectangles (DIRECT), efficient global optimization (EGO), and MPS using a suite of standard test problems and an engineering design problem. The results show that TRMPS2 performs better on average than GA, DIRECT, EGO, and MPS for high dimensional, expensive, and black box (HEB) 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.259 · 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