MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolving Distributed Control for an Object Clustering Task

2005· article· en· W2621359109 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComplex Systems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoAir Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTask (project management)Cluster analysisComputer scienceScalingKey (lock)Object (grammar)PopulationControl (management)Distributed computingGenetic algorithmSensitivity (control systems)Constant (computer programming)RobotCluster (spacecraft)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by social insects, the possibility of evolving distributed control for a task requiring global coordination is investigated. The task is object clustering. A key aspect of this work is that a population of robot-like agents is allowed to select the cluster location. A detailed examination of how solutions evolved by a genetic algorithm are able to scale as key parameters are varied is presented, allowing commentary on the sensitivity of the evolved solution to changes in the environment. In most of the scaling experiments, the solution degrades gracefully about the evolutionary design point. However, in the case of constant-density scaling, the solution maintains its effectiveness as the problem is made larger.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.242 · 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