MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891775780 · doi:10.1109/inista.2018.8466330

A Multilevel Cooperative Multi-Population Cultural Algorithm

2018· article· en· W2891775780 on OpenAlexaff
Dilpreet Singh, Pooya Moradian Zadeh, Ziad Kobti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Selection (genetic algorithm)Group selectionComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)PopulationGroup (periodic table)Evolutionary algorithmProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningMathematical optimizationMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new architecture for Multi-Population Cultural Algorithm is proposed which incorporates a new Multilevel Selection framework (ML-MPCA). The approach used in this paper is based on biological group selection theory which aims to improve the capability of MPCA to tackle evolution of cooperation. A two-level selection process is introduced namely within-group selection and between-group selection. Individuals interact with the other members of the group in an evolutionary game that determines their fitness. If the group reaches a certain size, it splits into two daughter groups. We test our algorithm on CEC 2015 expensive benchmark functions to evaluate its performance. We show that our proposed algorithm improves solution accuracy and consistency. The model can be extended to more than two levels of selection and can also include migration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207