Schematic study on interaction and imbalance effects of variables for Large-Scale Optimization
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the recent years, Large-Scale Global Optimization (LSGO) algorithms attempt to solve real-world problems efficiently. The imbalance in the contribution of variables and the interaction among variables pose major challenges for LSGO algorithms. This paper proposes mapping schemes based on the interaction among variables and the imbalance in the contribution of variables. The proposed mapping schemes present the different relations between the constructed class of variables according to the interaction feature and the constructed class of variables according to the imbalance feature. Covering a wide range of real-world problems is considered in the mapping schemes; therefore it can provide some insights to design LSGO benchmark suites. By developing LSGO benchmark suites with the ability of representing many-real world problems, researchers will be motivated to realize the success or failure level of LSGO algorithms for tackling various types of LSGO problems. Also, a preliminary set of experiments is conducted to present the importance of considered features in each scheme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it