Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Quantum Algorithm for Multi-Objective 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
This paper presents a new multi-objective optimization method, which is inspired from the idea of non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA) and genetic quantum algorithm (GQA). The GQA has been tested on well known test beds in single objective optimization and compared with the genetic algorithm (GA) in the lead author’s previous work [22]. This paper aims to apply the idea of GQA to multi-objective optimization (MOO). The developed method is called non-dominated sorting genetic quantum algorithm (NSGQA). The developed method is tested with benchmark problems collected from literature, which have characteristics representing various aspects of a MOO problem. Test results show that NSGQA has better performance on most benchmark problems than currently popular MOO methods such as the NSGA. The integration of GQA with MOO, and the systematic comparison with other MOO methods on benchmark problems, should be of general interest to researchers on MOO and to practitioners using MOO methods in design.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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