Strength Pareto Particle Swarm Optimization and Hybrid EA-PSO 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 proposes an efficient particle swarm optimization (PSO) technique that can handle multi-objective optimization problems. It is based on the strength Pareto approach originally used in evolutionary algorithms (EA). The proposed modified particle swarm algorithm is used to build three hybrid EA-PSO algorithms to solve different multi-objective optimization problems. This algorithm and its hybrid forms are tested using seven benchmarks from the literature and the results are compared to the strength Pareto evolutionary algorithm (SPEA2) and a competitive multi-objective PSO using several metrics. The proposed algorithm shows a slower convergence, compared to the other algorithms, but requires less CPU time. Combining PSO and evolutionary algorithms leads to superior hybrid algorithms that outperform SPEA2, the competitive multi-objective PSO (MO-PSO), and the proposed strength Pareto PSO based on different metrics.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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