Chemical Genetic Algorithms—Evolutionary Optimization of Binary-to-Real-Value Translation in Genetic Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A chemical genetic algorithm (CGA) in which several types of molecules (information units) react with each other in a cell is proposed. Not only the information in DNA, but also smaller molecules responsible for the transcription and translation of DNA into amino acids, are adaptively changed during evolution, which optimizes the fundamental mapping from binary substrings in DNA ( genotype) to real values for a parameter set (phenotype). Through the struggle between cells containing a DNA unit and small molecular units, the codes (DNA) and the interpreter (the small molecular units) coevolve, and a specific output function, from which a cell's fitness is evaluated, is optimized. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the CGA, it is applied to a set of variable-separable and variable-inseparable problems, and it is shown that the CGA can robustly solve a wide range of optimization problems regardless of their fitness characteristics. To ascertain the optimization of the genotype-to-phenotype mapping by the CGA, we also conduct analytical experiments for some problems while observing the basin size of a global optimum solution in the binary genotype space. The results show that the CGA effectively augments the basin size, makes it easier for evolution to find a path to the global optimum solution, and enhances the GA's evolvability during evolution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".