MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983072446 · doi:10.1177/1548512914547798

A comparison of heuristics applied to the sensor deployment problem in two dimensions

2014· article· en· W1983072446 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

VenueThe Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation Applications Methodology Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreSt. Lawrence College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsDifferential evolutionSwap (finance)MetaheuristicSoftware deploymentComputer scienceGenetic algorithmMathematical optimizationSimulated annealingAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents some interesting results that compare three heuristics applied to the sensor deployment problem. These heuristics are the genetic algorithm (GA), differential evolution (DE), and vertex swap algorithm (VSA). In both of two test problems, solved independently hundreds of times, the VSA routinely demonstrates better performance in terms of the quality of the solution and in lower execution times. The VSA is also combined with both the GA and DE to produce hybrid metaheuristics. However, repeated tests demonstrated that this provides little to no improvement in the quality of the final solution. Thus, a simple local search may be all that is needed for certain types of 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.319 · 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