A New Constrained Multiobjective Optimization Algorithm Based on Artificial Immune Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a new constrained multiobjective optimization algorithm based on artificial immune systems (AIS). To deal with constrained multiobjective optimization problems, the constrained AlS-based multiobjective optimization algorithm is developed by integrating a proposed constraint-handling technique with the unconstrained AIS-based multiobjective optimization algorithm named MOAIS (Xiao and Zu, 2006). We propose the constraint-handling technique by extending a single-objective constraint-handling technique called stochastic ranking (Runarsson and Yao, 2000) to multiobjective optimization process. Two scenarios of the multiobjective version of stochastic ranking are suggested. Thereafter, we develop the constrained MOAIS named MOAIS+SR by integrating the two scenarios with MOAIS. A comparative study is performed quantitatively to assess the performance of MOAIS+SR on a constrained test function suite called CTP test problems. In the comparative study, MOAIS+SR is compared against two other constrained multiobjective algorithms. The simulation results show that the proposed multiobjective stochastic ranking outperforms the constrained-dominance principle (Deb et al., 2000) in handling constraints. Furthermore, we show that the proposed MOAIS+SR achieves the best overall performance among the three algorithms under consideration on the CTP test problems. This study demonstrates that the proposed MOAIS+SR is highly competitive with other state-of-the-art algorithms in constrained multiobjective optimization.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".