MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293460382 · doi:10.1162/evco_a_00175

Global WASF-GA: An Evolutionary Algorithm in Multiobjective Optimization to Approximate the Whole Pareto Optimal Front

2016· article· en· W2293460382 on OpenAlexaff
Rubén Saborido, Ana Belén Mirete Ruíz, Mariano Luque

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Computation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersMinistry of Economic Affairs
KeywordsMulti-objective optimizationEvolutionary algorithmWeightingMathematical optimizationNadirWeightMetric (unit)MathematicsSet (abstract data type)Function (biology)Genetic algorithmPareto principleAlgorithmWeight functionGlobal optimizationComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we propose a new evolutionary algorithm for multiobjective optimization called Global WASF-GA ( global weighting achievement scalarizing function genetic algorithm), which falls within the aggregation-based evolutionary algorithms. The main purpose of Global WASF-GA is to approximate the whole Pareto optimal front. Its fitness function is defined by an achievement scalarizing function (ASF) based on the Tchebychev distance, in which two reference points are considered (both utopian and nadir objective vectors) and the weight vector used is taken from a set of weight vectors whose inverses are well-distributed. At each iteration, all individuals are classified into different fronts. Each front is formed by the solutions with the lowest values of the ASF for the different weight vectors in the set, using the utopian vector and the nadir vector as reference points simultaneously. Varying the weight vector in the ASF while considering the utopian and the nadir vectors at the same time enables the algorithm to obtain a final set of nondominated solutions that approximate the whole Pareto optimal front. We compared Global WASF-GA to MOEA/D (different versions) and NSGA-II in two-, three-, and five-objective problems. The computational results obtained permit us to conclude that Global WASF-GA gets better performance, regarding the hypervolume metric and the epsilon indicator, than the other two algorithms in many cases, especially in three- and five-objective problems.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations70
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionary ComputationSame topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207