Identifying and exploiting the scale of a search space in particle swarm optimization
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
Multi-modal optimization involves two distinct tasks: identifying promising attraction basins and finding the local optima in these basins. Unfortunately, the second task can interfere with the first task if they are performed simultaneously. Specifically, the promise of an attraction basin is often estimated by the fitness of a single sample solution, so an attraction basin represented by a random sample solution can appear to be less promising than an attraction basin represented by its local optimum. The goal of thresheld convergence is to prevent these biased comparisons by disallowing local search while global search is still in progress. Ideally, thresheld convergence achieves this goal by using a distance threshold that is correlated to the size of the attraction basins in the search space. In this paper, a clustering-based method is developed to identify the scale of the search space which thresheld convergence can then exploit. The proposed method employed in the context of a multi-start particle swarm optimization algorithm has led to large improvements across a broad range of multi-modal 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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