MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897904533 · doi:10.1109/cec.2018.8477823

Discrete Firefly Algorithm: A New Metaheuristic Approach for Solving Constraint Satisfaction Problems

2018· article· en· W2897904533 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Bidar, Malek Mouhoub, Samira Sadaoui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicConstraint Satisfaction and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirefly algorithmConstraint satisfaction problemMetaheuristicConstraint satisfactionMathematical optimizationConstraint (computer-aided design)Firefly protocolComputer scienceAlgorithmHybrid algorithm (constraint satisfaction)Combinatorial optimizationConstraint satisfaction dual problemMeta heuristicMathematicsLocal consistencyArtificial intelligenceParticle swarm optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Constraint Satisfaction Problems are regarded as NP-Complete problems which solving them with systematic methods requires exponential time. Firefly algorithm is a nature inspired algorithm which has been successfully applied to different combinatorial problems. This paper presents a new Discrete Firefly Algorithm for Solving Constraint Satisfaction problems (CSPs) and investigates its applicability for dealing with such problems. Performance of the proposed method has been assessed through extensive experiments on CSP instances generated by Model RB which is a standard mean for generating CSPs with different tightness. Results of the experiments in comparison with other methods including classical methods and other metaheuristic methods clearly demonstrate the significant performance of proposed discrete firefly algorithm in dealing with CSPs.

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)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConstraint Satisfaction and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207