MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615441104

Modeling an Augmented Lagrangian for Improved Blackbox Constrained Optimization

2014· article· en· W2615441104 on OpenAlexaff
Robert B. Gramacy, Genetha A. Gray, Sébastien Le Digabel, Herbert K. H. Lee, Pritam Ranjan, Stefan M. Wild

Bibliographic record

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsBooth University College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented Lagrangian methodMathematical optimizationComputer scienceHeuristicsBenchmark (surveying)BottleneckContext (archaeology)Lagrangian relaxationOptimization problemSensitivity (control systems)Mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Constrained blackbox optimization is a difficult problem, with most approaches coming from the mathematical programming literature. The statistical literature is sparse, especially in addressing problems with nontrivial constraints. This situation is unfortunate because statistical methods have many attractive properties: global scope, handling noisy objectives, sensitivity analysis, and so forth. To narrow that gap, we propose a combination of response surface modeling, expected improvement, and the augmented Lagrangian numerical optimization framework. This hybrid approach allows the statistical model to think globally and the augmented Lagrangian to act locally. We focus on problems where the constraints are the primary bottleneck, requiring expensive simulation to evaluate and substantial modeling effort to map out. In that context, our hybridization presents a simple yet effective solution that allows existing objective-oriented statistical approaches, like those based on Gaussian process surrogates and expected improvement heuristics, to be applied to the constrained setting with minor modification. This work is motivated by a challenging, real-data benchmark problem from hydrology where, even with a simple linear objective function, learning a nontrivial valid region complicates the search for a global minimum.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal)Same topicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207