MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004624951 · doi:10.2495/data070071

Genetic Algorithms in a dynamically changing environment

2007· article· en· W2004624951 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

VenueWIT transactions on information and communication technologies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossoverComputer scienceTransformation (genetics)Genetic algorithmSelection (genetic algorithm)Operator (biology)Generator (circuit theory)Adaptation (eye)PopulationMathematical optimizationQuality control and genetic algorithmsMutationAlgorithmLinear mapGenetic operatorMeta-optimizationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic Algorithms (GAs) are search methods based on principles of natural selection and genetics. GAs attempt to find optimal solutions to a given problem by manipulating a population of candidate solutions (individuals). In the real world, we always encounter the problems that need to be solved in a changing environment. This means that our algorithm needs to be dynamic or even adaptive to the changing environment. In this paper, we mainly deal with the adaptive GAs that have a new genetic operator called transformation instead of the traditional crossover. We use a dynamic problem generator to create a dynamically changing landscape and study the behavior of the transformation-based GAs in different parameter settings, such as transformation rate, mutation rate and segment replacement rate.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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