A New Parallel GA-Based Method for Constraint Satisfaction Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite some success of Genetic Algorithms (GAs) when tackling Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSPs), they generally suffer from poor crossover operators. In order to overcome this limitation in practice, we propose a novel crossover specifically designed for solving CSPs including Temporal CSPs (TCSPs). Together with a variable ordering heuristic and an integration into a parallel architecture, this proposed crossover enables the solving of large and hard problem instances as demonstrated by the experimental tests conducted on randomly generated CSPs and TCSPs based on the model RB. We will indeed demonstrate, through these tests, that our proposed method is superior to the known GA-based techniques for CSPs. In addition, we will show that we are able to compete with the efficient MAC-based Abscon 109 solver for random problem instances as well as those instances taken from Lecoutre’s CSP library. Finally, we conducted additional tests on very large consistent and over constrained CSPs and TCSPs instances in order to show the ability of our method to deal with constraint problems in real time. This corresponds to solving the CSP or the TCSP by giving a solution with a quality (number of solved constraints) depending on the time allocated for computation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".