Optimization on Metamodeling-Supported Iterative Decomposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recently developed metamodel-based decomposition strategy relies on quantifying the variable correlations of black-box functions so that high-dimensional problems are decomposed to smaller subproblems, before performing optimization. Such a two-step method may miss the global optimum due to its rigidity or requires extra expensive sample points for ensuring adequate decomposition. This work develops a strategy to iteratively decompose high-dimensional problems within the optimization process. The sample points used during the optimization are reused to build a metamodel called principal component analysis-high dimensional model representation (PCA-HDMR) for quantifying the intensities of variable correlations by sensitivity analysis. At every iteration, the predicted intensities of the correlations are updated based on all the evaluated points, and a new decomposition scheme is suggested by omitting the weak correlations. Optimization is performed on the iteratively updated subproblems from decomposition. The proposed strategy is applied for optimization of different benchmarks and engineering problems, and results are compared to direct optimization of the undecomposed problems using trust region mode pursuing sampling method (TRMPS), genetic algorithm (GA), cooperative coevolutionary algorithm with correlation-based adaptive variable partitioning (CCEA-AVP), and divide rectangles (DIRECT). The results show that except for the category of undecomposable problems with all or many strong (i.e., important) correlations, the proposed strategy effectively improves the accuracy of the optimization results. The advantages of the new strategy in comparison with the previous methods are also discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".