MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809652621 · doi:10.5539/mas.v12n7p73

Collaborative Strategy for Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithm

2018· article· en· W2809652621 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Particle swarm optimizationAlgorithmComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Mathematical optimizationMetaheuristicFeature (linguistics)HeuristicsSearch algorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grey wolf Optimizer (GWO) is one of the well known meta-heuristic algorithm for determining the minimum value among a set of values. In this paper, we proposed a novel optimization algorithm called collaborative strategy for grey wolf optimizer (CSGWO). This algorithm enhances the behaviour of GWO that enhances the search feature to search for more points in the search space, whereas more groups will search for the global minimal points. The algorithm has been tested on 23 well-known benchmark functions and the results are verified by comparing them with state of the art algorithms: Polar particle swarm optimizer, sine cosine Algorithm (SCA), multi-verse optimizer (MVO), supernova optimizer as well as particle swarm optimizer (PSO). The results show that the proposed algorithm enhanced GWO behaviour for reaching the best solution and showed competitive results that outperformed the compared meta-heuristics over the tested benchmarked functions.

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)0.002
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.285 · 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