MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082820221 · doi:10.1115/detc2008-49991

Enhanced Multi-Agent Normal Sampling Technique for Global Optimization

2008· article· en· W2082820221 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Saremi, Amir Hossein Birjandi, G. Gary Wang, Tarek Y. ElMekkawy, Eric Bibeau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceSampling (signal processing)Global optimizationStandard deviationNormal distributionAlgorithmMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an enhanced version of a new global optimization method, Multi-Agent Normal Sampling Technique (MANST) described in reference [1]. Each agent in MANST includes a number of points that sample around the mean point with a certain standard deviation. In each step the point with the minimum value in the agent is chosen as the center point for the next step normal sampling. Then the chosen points of all agents are compared to each other and agents receive a certain share of the resources for the next step according to their lowest mean function value at the current step. The performance of all agents is periodically evaluated and a specific number of agents who show no promising achievements are deleted; new agents are generated in the proximity of those promising agents. This process continues until the agents converge to the global optimum. MANST is a standalone global optimization technique and does not require equations or knowledge about the objective function. The unique feature of this method in comparison with other global optimization methods is its dynamic normal distribution search. This work presents our recent research in enhancing MANST to handle variable boundaries and constraints. Moreover, a lean group sampling approach is implemented to prevent sampling in the same region for different agents. The overall capability and efficiency of the MANST has been improved as a result in the newer version. The enhanced MANST is highly competitive with other stochastic methods such as Genetic Algorithm (GA). In most of the test cases, the performance of the MANST is significantly higher than the Matlab™ GA Toolbox.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207