High-Dimensional Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization on Heterogeneous Systems
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
Much work has recently been reported in parallel GPU-based particle swarm optimization (PSO). Motivated by the encouraging results of these investigations, while also recognizing the limitations of GPU-based methods for big problems using a large amount of data, this paper explores the efficacy of employing other types of parallel hardware for PSO. Most commodity systems feature a variety of architectures whose high-performance capabilities can be exploited. In this paper, high-dimensional problems and those that employ a large amount of external data are explored within the context of heterogeneous systems. Large problems are decomposed into constituent components, and analyses are undertaken of which components would benefit from multi-core or GPU parallelism. The current study therefore provides another demonstration that "supercomputing on a budget" is possible when subtasks of large problems are run on hardware most suited to these tasks. Experimental results show that large speedups can be achieved on high dimensional, data-intensive problems. Cost functions must first be analysed for parallelization opportunities, and assigned hardware based on the particular task.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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