MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997744027 · doi:10.1109/cec.2012.6256132

Particle Swarm Optimization with Adaptive Bounds

2012· article· en· W1997744027 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationMaxima and minimaEstimation of distribution algorithmBenchmark (surveying)Mathematical optimizationPremature convergenceMetaheuristicMulti-swarm optimizationComputer scienceConvergence (economics)Evolutionary algorithmProbabilistic logicLocal search (optimization)AlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is a stochastic optimization approach that originated from early attempts to simulate the behavior of birds looking for food. Estimation of distributions algorithms (EDAs) are a class of evolutionary algorithms that build and maintain a probabilistic model capturing the search space characteristics and continuously use this model to generate new individuals. In this work, we propose a new PSO and EDA hybrid algorithm that uses the particles' distribution in the search space in order to adjust the search space bounds, hence, restricting the particles movement as well as their allowable maximum velocity. The algorithms is augmented with a mechanism to overcome premature convergence and escape local minima. The algorithm is compared to the standard PSO algorithm using a suite of well-known benchmark optimization functions. Experimental results show that the proposed algorithm has a promising performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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