Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic Algorithms (GA), which are based on the idea of optimizing by simulating the natural processes of evolution, have proven successful in solving complex problems that are not easily solved through conventional methods. This chapter introduces their major steps, operators, theoretical foundations, and problems. A parallel GA is an extension of the classical GA that takes advantage of a GA’s inherent parallelism to improve its time performance and reduce the likelihood of premature convergence. An overview of different models for parallelizing GAs is presented along with a discussion of their main advantages and disadvantages. A case study: A parallel GA for finding Ramsey Numbers is then presented. According to Ramsey Theory, a sufficiently large system (no matter how random) will always contain highly organized subsystems. The role of Ramsey numbers is to quantify some of these existential theorems. Finding Ramsey numbers has proven to be a very difficult task that has led researchers to experiment with different methods of accomplishing this task. The objective of the case study is both to illustrate the typical process of GA development and to verify the superior performance of parallel GAs in solving some of the problems (e.g., premature convergence) of traditional GAs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".