MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063574152 · doi:10.1109/cec.2014.6900591

Genetic algorithm with self-adaptive mutation controlled by chromosome similarity

2014· article· en· W2063574152 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 institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Adaptive mutationMutationComputer scienceGenetic algorithmAlgorithmMathematical optimizationLocal optimumBenchmarkingChromosomeMutation rateMathematicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems using genetic algorithms (GA) with self-adaptive mutation. We selected the N-Queens problem (8 ≤ N ≤ 32) as our benchmarking test suite, as they are highly multi-modal with huge numbers of global optima. Optimal static mutation probabilities for the traditional GA approach are determined for each N to use as a best-case scenario benchmark in our conducted comparative analysis. Despite an unfair advantage with traditional GA using optimized fixed mutation probabilities, in large problem sizes (where N > 15) multi-objective analysis showed the self-adaptive approach yielded a 65% to 584% improvement in the number of distinct solutions generated; the self-adaptive approach also produced the first distinct solution faster than traditional GA with a 1.90% to 70.0% speed improvement. Self-adaptive mutation control is valuable because it adjusts the mutation rate based on the problem characteristics and search process stages accordingly. This is not achievable with an optimal constant mutation probability which remains unchanged during the search process.

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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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